Introducing
The Slant team built an AI & it’s awesome
Find the best product instantly
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now
4.7 star rating
0
Development
Frontend Development
What are the best JavaScript libraries for testing common browser behavior?
3
Options
Considered
10
User
Recs.
Jan 20, 2016
Last
Updated
Related Questions
Activity
Have feedback or ideas?
Join our community
on Discord
Ad
3
Options
Considered
Best JavaScript libraries for testing common browser behavior
Price
Last Updated
--
PhantomJS
-
Jan 20, 2016
--
CasperJS
-
Jan 19, 2016
--
Zombie.js
-
Jan 18, 2016
See Full List
--
PhantomJS
My Rec
ommendation
for
PhantomJS
My Recommendation for
PhantomJS
All
3
Pros
2
Cons
1
Top
Pro
•••
Supports many browser standards
PhantomJS has full DOM and CSS parsing, JSON, canvas, and SVG support.
See More
Top
Con
•••
Heavy setup
You'll often end up having PhantomJS binaries connected via WebDriver to your testing framework, possibly using client/server especially if you want your test running with something else than Java. This mean an overhead in terms or maintenance and performance, but still usually lighter than running a full browser (like Chrome, Firefox, IE).
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Built on WebKit
WebKit is becoming the gold standard for browser compatibility, making it a good starting point for native headless browser testing.
See More
Hide
See All
Get it
here
Recommend
5
--
CasperJS
My Rec
ommendation
for
CasperJS
My Recommendation for
CasperJS
All
4
Pros
3
Cons
1
Top
Pro
•••
Allows screenshots (either the full page or parts of it) if performing UI testing
There are times where you don't want to open up a browser for screencaps, that is where CasperJS comes to use, it can render the page using its own rendering engine and take and save a screenshot for you, all via the commandline
See More
Top
Con
•••
Cannot guarantee 100% accurate Webkit-based browser screenshots
QtWebKit is the rendering engine used by CasperJS. Keep in mind this is not the same rendering engine as Chrome; hence, if you want to be 100% sure of the results, you must run a Webkit browser (such as Chrome) yourself.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Can run javascript code inside pages being tested
Can execute arbitrary javascript or load external JS into the page being tested. This feature is possible due to the presence of a rendering engine, and helps you see the effects of any client side scripting during your tests.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Easily integrates with other applications
Due to the simplicity of the framework, not only other libraries can be built with it, but it can be integrated with any web application as well.
See More
Hide
See All
Get it
here
Recommend
3
--
Zombie.js
My Rec
ommendation
for
Zombie.js
My Recommendation for
Zombie.js
All
2
Pros
1
Cons
1
Top
Con
•••
Fails to load many sites
As its JavaScript and DOM engine are mostly "just good enough" and because by design it'll report all errors and stop there, many complex sites will not load properly through Zombie.js.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Fully featured api based interaction and assertion
The way the api is built makes it very easy to add to your test framework.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
1
1
Don't see your favorite option? Add it.
Built By the Slant team
Find the best product instantly.
4.7 star rating
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now - it's free
One sec!
Are you sure that you want to abandon your hard work?
Delete Work
Continue working
{}
undefined
url next
price drop