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
What is the best alternative to Mocha?
Ad
Ad
Jasmine
All
6
Experiences
Pros
5
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Behaviour Driven Development focused
If you prefer your test cases and applications to be developed from the perspective of your stake holders, Jasmine is the framework for you.
See More
Top
Con
Maintainers are not very responsive to pull requests
Pivotal aren't responsive to pull requests, though they have made repo changes within < 3 months
See More
Top
Pro
Easy to find Jasmine tutorials for most MV* frameworks,
whilst Mocha is still considered the new kid on the block.
See More
Top
Pro
Has a very readable and user-friendly syntax
Code readability is an important factor, if the application development involves multiple teams; if the testing team is unable to read your test cases then they won't be able to test it. Jasmine resolves this issue by providing developers with an extremely simple and "human-friendly" syntax.
See More
Top
Pro
Allows both DOM-less as well as asynchronous testing
If you have some test cases that do not involve testing of DOM elements or events, those are exactly the ones where you want to use Jasmine. It'll provide smooth, simple and easy DOM-less testing of those test cases.
See More
Top
Pro
Integrates very well with Ruby on Rails
The jasmine-rails gem allows you to run Jasmine specs in a browser (powered by Rails engine mounted into your application).
See More
Hide
Get it
here
50
9
tape
All
5
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Simple API
Very simple API that doesn't require globals, or monkey patching objects for assertions.
See More
Top
Con
No concurrency
Cannot run async test cases concurrently for faster test builds.
See More
Top
Pro
Built-in assert
This way you don't have to add more dependencies and external assertion libraries.
See More
Top
Pro
No global functions
Tape does not use global methods such as "it", "describe", since they are not considered best practice in JavaScript.
See More
Top
Pro
It follows the principles of TAP
TAP: Test Anything Protocol
See More
Hide
Get it
here
40
2
Jest
All
5
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Easy to use
One of Jest's philosophies is to provide an integrated “zero-configuration” experience. Eg: it provides assertion library by default.
See More
Top
Con
Not beginner-friendly
If you're new to unit testing and are trying to understand unit testing within the React ecosystem, specifically ReactNative, it is going to be a challenge. The Jest doc dives right into making tests without any primer on how to go from concept to implementation.
See More
Top
Pro
Well documented
See More
Top
Pro
Recommended for React testing
Jest is the recommended unit testing framework by Facebook. It's also the one used by Facebook developers when working with React projects.
See More
Top
Pro
Snapshot testing is convinient
It's great for testing UI. It is also convenient for asserting complex data objects, as it doesn't require developers to manually compose the expected value.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
38
1
QUnit
All
4
Experiences
Pros
3
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Tests run in the order they're added to the suite
In cases where you want (I know your test cases must be atomic) where you really really want your test cases to run in a specific order, maybe if the current one rely on those of previous case, you can use Qunit by setting QUnit.config.reorder = false and your test cases will run in the order you've provided.
See More
Top
Con
Testing of Async operations can be a little tough at times.
Qunit, expects us to call the start() function before the Async function itself, and stop() after it stops. This can be a problem when you have no way of knowing, when your function will start or stop (your testing a number of dependent functions)
See More
Top
Pro
Works really well if performing DOM Testing
All frontend developers already know the ease that jQuery framework has brought to their lives, in handling DOM events and accessing elements. Since Qunit was built as a part of jquery (is even used by jQuery itself for unit testing) hence it makes testing of DOM elements a lot easier.
See More
Top
Pro
Extremely easy to start from scratch
Seriously! All you have to do is include the Qunit library from the CDN, then create your Testcases js file, and RUN IT! . Your outputs would be displayed in a pretty little format in your browser.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
8
5
Cypress
All
7
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
3
Top
Pro
Web UI to develop tests quickly
You can edit your test code in the browser and instantly see it run as you change the code.
See More
Top
Con
Doesn't support Safari
See More
Top
Pro
Easy to record a video
It can easily record a video so you can understand what happened when a test failed in your CI.
See More
Top
Con
Single tab only
Does not and will not support multiple tabs or multiple simultaneous browsers. See https://docs.cypress.io/guides/references/trade-offs.html#Permanent-trade-offs-1
See More
Top
Pro
Amazing dashboard to view reports and recordings
The Cypress dashboard allows you to see every run on a great UI linked to commits and gitflow.
See More
Top
Con
Heavy in setup
Do not add Cypress in the main repo. Have a specific test repo for it or you will be sorry when the CI/CD flow takes 5-6 min longer every build due to installation time of Cypress.
See More
Top
Pro
Cross Browser testing
https://docs.cypress.io/guides/guides/cross-browser-testing.html Chrome Firefox Edge Electron Brave
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
59
8
Webpack
All
11
Experiences
Pros
9
Cons
2
Top
Pro
Rich and flexible plugin infrastructure
Plugins and loaders are easy to write and allow you to control each step of the build, from loading and compiling CoffeeScript, LESS and JADE files to smart post processing and asset manifest building.
See More
Top
Con
Config file may be hard to understand
Due to a somewhat hard to grasp syntax, configuring Webpack may take some time.
See More
Top
Pro
Tap into npm's huge module ecosystem
Using Webpack opens you up to npm, that has over 80k modules of which a great amount work both client-side and server-side. And the list is growing rapidly.
See More
Top
Con
Can not load files discovered during runtime
See More
Top
Pro
Can create a single bundle or multiple chunks loaded on demand, to reduce initial loading time
Webpack allows you to split your codebase into multiple chunks. Chunks are loaded on demand. This reduces the initial loading time.
See More
Top
Pro
Supports source maps for easier debugging
Source maps allow for easier debugging, because they allow you to find the problems within the origin files instead of the output file.
See More
Top
Pro
ES6 module support
Webpack supports ES6 modules and their import and export methods without having to compile them to CommonJS require
See More
Top
Pro
Share the same modules client-side and server-side
Because Webpack allows you to use the same require() function as node.js, you can easily share modules between the client-side and server-side.
See More
Top
Pro
Bundles CommonJs and AMD modules (even combined)
Webpack supports AMD and CommonJS module styles. It performs clever static analysis on the AST of your code. It even has an evaluation engine to evaluate simple expressions. This allows you to support most existing libraries.
See More
Top
Pro
Mix ES6 AMD and CommonJS
Webpack supports using all three module types, even in the same file.
See More
Top
Pro
Limit plugin integration issues
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
107
17
RocketCake
All
6
Experiences
Pros
5
Specs
Top
Pro
Offline
You can work offline as RocketCake is an installable Windows or Mac application. It's also possible to publish on a local disk first before uploading to a webserver.
See More
Top
Pro
Wysiwyg
No need for coding.
See More
Top
Pro
Mobile support
Support for e.g. iPhone 8, iPhone 7+, iPhone 8+, iPhone X, Samsung Galaxy S8, Galaxy S8+, LG G4, LG G5.
See More
Top
Pro
PHP and ASP support
It's possible to use PHP or ASP to create dynamic websites.
See More
Top
Pro
Templates
15 free templates to choose from.
See More
Specs
Platforms:
Windows, Mac
WYSIWYG:
Yes
Hide
Free / paid
16
1
Yeoman
All
11
Experiences
Pros
10
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Active community
Yeoman has an active community with new generators being created at a rapid pace. Because of the momentum behind the community, you can expect good support and adoption for new tools and frameworks promptly after they come out.
See More
Top
Con
Combining Yeoman and backend frameworks can bring problems
Combining Yeoman and a backend framework such as Django, Rails or Laravel can create problem because the project structure of Yeoman may not be compatible with that of the backend project. It can be tuned to work but for small projects it can be relatively time consuming.
See More
Top
Pro
Huge number of generators for scaffolding your project
Yeoman generators allow you to quickly set up a new project. Invoked with the scaffolding tool 'yo' they provide a boilerplate & tooling selection. There are over 1000 generators, including generators for ember, angular & backbone, to choose from, the majority of which are community maintained.
See More
Top
Pro
Allows you to choose between different build systems
Yeoman supports both major build systems - Grunt and Gulp. These build systems will help you automate tasks such as minification & concatenation of files, running tests, deploying and live-updating your webpage among many others.
See More
Top
Pro
Free and open source
Yeoman is free, open source and licensed under BSD.
See More
Top
Pro
Support for the package manager of your choice
Yeoman supports both Bower and npm, and is flexible in regard to tools to allow it to work with a wider range of project requirements.
See More
Top
Pro
Standardized workflow process
Yeoman wants webapp development to be more standardized under the "Yeoman workflow" banner. As such it encourages the use of a specific combination of tools - a scaffolding tool (yo), a build tool (grunt, gulp, etc) and a package manager (bower, npm).
See More
Top
Pro
Generators can be composed with other generators
Yeoman's scaffolding system allows generators to rely on other generators allowing for better code reuse and standardization between generators that use a common sub-component.
See More
Top
Pro
Cross-platform
As a command line tool it works on OS X, Linux & Windows.
See More
Top
Pro
Works with the package manager directly
Yeoman doesn't just scaffold your project, but also helps you integrate with your package manager directly, so you can manage your entire project with it.
See More
Top
Pro
Developers can create their own plugins
Developers can also create their own Yeoman generator which are practically plugins with which Yeoman works. Generators are basically Node.js modules and can be created just like any other Node module. There is also a very detailed and useful guide on how to create a generator on the Yeoman official website.
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
43
3
Nightwatch.js
All
6
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
2
Top
Pro
You don't have to choose a testing framework
Nightwatch solves the Paradox of Choice among testing frameworks such as Jasmine, Cucumber or Mocha+Chai, by including its own BDD-style assertion library, based on Chai.
See More
Top
Con
No official BDD-style syntax support
See More
Top
Pro
Includes its own testing framework / assertions library
See More
Top
Con
Includes its own testing framework / assertions library
Unlike WebdriverIO, which lets you use various test frameworks and assertion libraries (e.g. Jasmine, Cucumber, Mocha + Chai), Nightwatch comes with its own BDD-style interface for performing assertions, based on Chai. Here's a simple test example: module.exports = { 'Demo test Google' : function (browser) { browser .url('http://www.google.com') .waitForElementVisible('body', 1000) .setValue('input[type=text]', 'nightwatch') .waitForElementVisible('button[name=btnG]', 1000) .click('button[name=btnG]') .pause(1000) .assert.containsText('#main', 'Night Watch') .end(); } };
See More
Top
Pro
Test organization is out of the box
Supports page object model, custom commands, custom assertions, and globals.js.
See More
Top
Pro
3rd party integration with Cucumber
Though Cucumber is not officially supported, Nightwatch can be used with Cucumber.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
31
3
BusterJS
All
6
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
2
Top
Pro
Supports deferring tests
No need to comment out your entire test case, now that you have Buster, which supports deferring a test so it doesn't actually run, but you get notified that there’s a deferred tests every time you run your test suite.
See More
Top
Con
Has no plugins for major IDE's (Eclipse/IntelliJ) yet.
Do you prefer running your test cases from inside your IDE? well BusterJS will make that a lot difficult for you if not impossible. You'll have to run Buster using the good old way of spawning up a new terminal for running the tests.
See More
Top
Pro
Flexible; extend it to wrap other test-frameworks
Have your test cases written in another framework, want to use BusterJS to run the tests, then you're in luck. BusterJS can be easily wrapped around other test frameworks. If you need to know how to do it, here's a link that showing just that.
See More
Top
Con
Currently still in Beta; some of the stuff still has bugs
Time of writing : 31st July 2014
See More
Top
Pro
Has support for NodeJS testing.
Working on a NodeJS app? BusterJS can help you Unit test it. This pretty much works just like browser tests, but you need to require Buster.JS in your tests.
See More
Top
Pro
You have the option of either running tests headless or via the browser
Don't have time to go through the lengthy process of opening up your browsers? BusterJS gives you the option of performing Headless tests. These are powered by PhantomJS; hence all your testing is done within the command line.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
2
0
Gulp
All
17
Experiences
Pros
11
Cons
5
Specs
Top
Pro
Large plugin ecosystem
Currently gulp offers a selection of 1000+ plugins and it is growing rapidly.
See More
Top
Con
Dead
Gulp is dead, hasn't been updated in 4 years.
See More
Top
Pro
Focuses on code instead of configuration
This depends on your style, but gulp is closer to the code, the actual execution isn't hidden by multiple layers and it's much easier to customize the build system without writing bloated modules. This also brings rather small configuration files.
See More
Top
Con
Rapidly changing API
While it's good that the gulp maintainers want the api to be as good as possible, it comes at the expense of stability. The upcoming gulp 4.0 release has another update to the way dependency management works which will require everyone to update their build scripts. It also makes it hard to look up information on best practices as the best practices keep changing, making a lot of the blog posts and questions about gulp out of date.
See More
Top
Pro
Allows creating task dependencies
Any task can be set to have other tasks as dependencies. The dependencies are specified through piping streams, and tasks run concurrently if they do not block in dependencies.
See More
Top
Con
You need to know some limitations that are not very intuitive
There are some features in Gulp which may not be very intuitive, or that otherwise should have been the default features instead of having to implement them through arguments. For example, to keep the correct folder structure when you are copying a file, you have to add {base: "lib/"} as an argument.
See More
Top
Pro
It is possible to use projects that use streams without plugins
Since Gulp just uses streams at its core, you don't actually need a plugin wrapper to use a project that uses streams. If you use this approach, the you don't even have to worry about plugin maintenance at all, and get the bleeding edge updates as soon as they come out even if the plugin hasn't been updated. It also means if a project happens to not have a plugin, you don't need to write a new one, you can just use it as is.
See More
Top
Con
No incremental building
See More
Top
Pro
Streaming build system makes it easier to apply code transformations
In gulp, it's easy to pipe multiple steps together which you commonly need with build systems. For example, you may need to compile the javascript source files, then package them together, and then minify it. The streaming system makes this much easier. Additionally, it improves performance since all operations are done in memory (compared to I/O operations) and avoids the need of unnecessarily compiling files (compared to Grunt that has to compile all files even if just one has changed).
See More
Top
Con
Not suited for big and complex apps
Writing gulpfile for complex app which consists of many source types is very cumbersome and flawy process. You'll know when you want to move to webpack.
See More
Top
Pro
Chaining API that's simple and elegant
In Gulp, the transforms are performed through chains which makes it easier to understand the order of operations, and easier to modify it.
See More
Top
Pro
Concurrency allows for high-speed perfomance
Because streams in Gulp use pipes to establish dependency order, they are parallel by default without having to rely on plugins or hacks.
See More
Top
Pro
Minimizes disk operations for improved performance
Because Gulp is built using streams, it can store intermediate transformations in memory and defer writing to disk until the very end. This improves performance by not requiring expensive blocking disk operations for task dependencies.
See More
Top
Pro
The configuration file is easily readable
Gulp's configuration file is actually very readable because it's actual JavaScript instead of a large file of JSON objects. The entry barrier is very low for developers who have never used a task runner before and it's API is very simple, with only 4 methods.
See More
Top
Pro
Gulp modules are usable without Gulp
Because Gulp is built on top of the streaming API, you don't actually need gulp to use them. This could be helpful if you want to re-use those modules outside of gulp, possibly for testing, and using the same modules would be more consistent.
See More
Top
Pro
Gulp tasks run from terminal
See More
Specs
Task instruction style:
code
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
110
12
CasperJS
All
7
Experiences
Pros
5
Cons
2
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
Not for unit testing but rather UI testing
These are two extremely different concepts. CasperJS should be removed from this list
See More
Top
Pro
Easy to understand
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
Written in JavaScript
Since all webdevs know JS, the start-up time of learning the framework will be reduced to zero, as your team can be productive from day one.
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
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
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
15
3
Insomnia
All
5
Experiences
Pros
4
Specs
Top
Pro
Detailed information about response
Response content and headers are presented in an accessible and readable format. JSON responses is prettified and can be filtered for for closer inspection.
See More
Top
Pro
Plugins
e.g. Swagger validator.
See More
Top
Pro
Can generate code
Generates code for more than 30 languages, including Curl, NodeJS, Go, Swift, Python, Java and C.
See More
Top
Pro
GraphQL support
See More
Specs
Platforms:
Windows, Linux, Mac
Hide
Free / paid
254
32
livedoc-mocha
All
5
Experiences
Pros
3
Cons
2
Top
Pro
Great looking test output
See More
Top
Con
Not great for Teams that don't value testing
As this takes more effort (ie you need to think harder about the test/spec) to write good tests. We found some team members didn't like it. If your team thinks tests are a tax, better to go with a simpler option like mocha.
See More
Top
Pro
Loads of options and create your own reports if needed
You can create your own reports as it can output the results in JSON. Not done it ourselves yet, but could be useful.
See More
Top
Con
To get maximum benefit need to write using Gherkin
The Gherkin language is a lot more verbose than what devs are used to writing in.
See More
Top
Pro
Powerful implementation of the Gherkin Spec
See More
Hide
FREE
1
0
Postman
All
15
Experiences
Pros
6
Cons
8
Specs
Top
Con
Version 8.x killed Postman - some problem related to "Teams"
Postman is forcing everybody to move their data to the cloud.
See More
Top
Pro
Free
See More
Top
Con
Insecure off-premise storage
To properly use this with full development and testing it stores API details, including security, in an off-site storage managed by Postman. It also stores details about employees, teams they are members of, and projects they are working on. This makes it inappropriate for any organization that is required to exercise a high level of security hygiene when developing software products. This issue may be compounded by the lack of details concerning the geolocation of data storage.
See More
Top
Pro
Flexible and powerful
Can easily add/remove parameters, headers, tests and more. Displays all the info you would want in a partitioned way so you can track exactly what you want. Able to save request and run them in bulk for testing real-user scenarios very efficiently.
See More
Top
Con
Proprietary, closed source software
Not free and open source.
See More
Top
Pro
Clear interface
The interface of the program is clean and intuitive. Almost all features are accessible through a single click.
See More
Top
Con
Resource hog
See More
Top
Pro
Two versions of apps are available
Packaged app and an in-browser app are available for Google Chrome.
See More
Top
Con
Bloated & cluttered
Bloated and cluttered, it's quicker to just have a js/ts template available to run some requests.
See More
Top
Pro
Excellent user feedback loop
Postman is very responsive to users and listens to user feedback.
See More
Top
Con
Limited free APIs
See More
Top
Pro
Dark theme
See More
Top
Con
Doesn't work right with localized queries
See More
Top
Con
Does not support Proxy authentication
See More
Specs
Platforms:
Windows, Linux, Mac
Dark Theme:
Yes
Hollywood formatting:
Yes
SSL certificate verification:
Yes
Hide
See All
Experiences
Free / paid
179
51
Google Web Designer
All
4
Experiences
Pros
1
Cons
2
Specs
Top
Con
It is not a tool for website design
It's only for animations, banners and so on.
See More
Top
Pro
Multi platform
Google Web Designer supports Mac, Windows and Linux.
See More
Top
Con
Currently in Beta
Google Web Designer was launched in 2013, and still remains in beta.
See More
Specs
Platforms:
Windows, Mac, Linux
WYSIWYG:
Yes
Hide
Get it
here
4
2
JSHint
All
5
Experiences
Pros
3
Cons
2
Top
Con
No way to support ESnext
There's no support for ESnext available.
See More
Top
Pro
Customizable ruleset
Since it's creation, JSHint was created to be a more configurable version of JSLint (it's actually a fork of JSLint itself). Every rule is configurable through a configuration file.
See More
Top
Con
Difficult to know which rule is causing an error
Because it does not display the rule name that is being broken, it's difficult to know which rule is actually causing the error.
See More
Top
Pro
Comes with support for many librariers
JSHint supports libraries like QUnit, NodeJS, jQuery, Mocha out of the box.
See More
Top
Pro
Basic ES6 support
Basic ES6 support is included.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
12
6
Grunt
All
13
Experiences
Pros
8
Cons
4
Specs
Top
Con
Grunt compatibility issues
Changes in different versions in grunt are not always backwards-compatible.
See More
Top
Pro
Configurations are easy to write
Grunt emphasizes configuration over code. As such grunt configurations are easy to write. Writing them does not require knowledge of streams, promises, concurrency, or asynchronous tasks to set up.
See More
Top
Con
Large bloated configuration files
To configure Grunt, developers need to basically write large files and configure JSON objects. While it's very powerful, the sheer complexity of it's configuration file may be a large obstacle for newcomers and developers that have not used any automation tools before. This may push them to search for simpler alternatives.
See More
Top
Pro
Has tons of plugins
Grunt has been available for a long time and during this time it has garnered a large community of dedicated developers who have made more than 4000 grunt plugins available to be used.
See More
Top
Con
Grunt lost mindshare in general
Grunt can only do what the individual plugins allow it to do. New tools aren't always being made available for Grunt, nor are they always being updated as quickly, so you're stuck with an aging ecosystem.
See More
Top
Pro
Plugins configured out of the box
The default behaviors for most plugins is normally what you want, so if you just use a plugin without configuring it, it will work for most use cases.
See More
Top
Con
The need to track creation/movement of files
Debugging and augmenting grunt pipelines are much harder than other build systems that clearly show the pipelines in the code. Grunt works on files so you must track where each task puts files and try and intercept that in a task if you want to add something in the middle of a build pipeline.
See More
Top
Pro
A GUI front-end via spock
A graphical user interface for grunt is available via spock.
See More
Top
Pro
Choice of using it as a config file or writing your own functions
You can use Grunt as a config file or JavaScript by writing your functions via Node Modules.
See More
Top
Pro
Grunt v1.0 alpha uses Orchestrator for maximum concurrency
Grunt version 1 alpha, aka grunt-next, the upcoming next major release of Grunt, uses Orchestrator to sequence and execute tasks and dependencies with maximum concurrency, potentially bringing it up to speed with Gulp in term of performance.
See More
Top
Pro
An API that makes writing and using of plugins extremely easy
The API is built in such a way that if you write a Grunt task that is useful for someone else out there or would be useful for future projects, it can be easily made into a grunt plugin and then shared using npm.
See More
Top
Pro
Shell commands inside Grunt
There is a Grunt plugin called grunt-exec which allows developers to execute shell commands inside their Grunt files. This is extremely easy if a developer is developing only in Node and constantly getting out of Node environment to run something like a git command can become frustrating.
See More
Specs
Number of Plugins:
4000+
Task instruction style:
Configuration
Processing method:
FIle-based
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
34
16
Karma
All
7
Experiences
Pros
5
Cons
2
Top
Pro
Easily extensible
Do you prefer other test frameworks such as Mocha, Jasmine, qUnit or any other framework? Well you're in luck as Karma can be easiliy be extended to wrap around ANY framework of your choice.
See More
Top
Con
No Support for NodeJS testing
Currently Karma doesn't support testing of apps built on NodeJS. So if you have a node app, you don't want to use Karma, Mocha or Jasmine can do the job for you.
See More
Top
Pro
Provides both Browser based testing as well as headless tests
Karma eases out the UI testing process as you can test your code on all your devices let it be smartphones, tablets or your very own desktop. If you don't want all of that, you always have the option of headless testing using a PhantomJS instance.
See More
Top
Con
No plugin for Eclipse (yet)
Do most of your code using Eclipse, well, you're in bad luck. Karma doesn't have an eclipse plugin, though if you are a real die hard eclipse fan, you can see this little hack to be able to run Karma from inside Eclipse Link (Time of writing: July 2014)
See More
Top
Pro
Provides the option of running client/servers either separately or on the Development computer
These options are really helpful in cases, where you have the luxury of multiple machines (tablets, mobile phones desktops) around you.
See More
Top
Pro
You can test your code in cross browser environments
Being able to test your code directly via your testing tool is a breeze! You don't need to download a fancy tool to see how your app looks in a number of different browsers, now that Karma would do the job for you.
See More
Top
Pro
Has plugins for WebStorm and is supported by the Netbeans IDE
Thanks to Karma, you won't need to spawn up a new terminal just so that you can test your app, you can now code and test right from the IDE
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
5
4
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
{}
undefined
url next
price drop