QUnit vs WebdriverIO
When comparing QUnit vs WebdriverIO, the Slant community recommends WebdriverIO for most people. In the question“What are the best automated browser testing frameworks?” WebdriverIO is ranked 5th while QUnit is ranked 9th. The most important reason people chose WebdriverIO is:
WebdriverIO lets you use your favorite testing framework (Jasmine, Mocha, Cucumber) and assertion library (Chai for Mocha). Other projects implement their own testing and assertion APIs, for example [Nightwatch](http://nightwatchjs.org/api), [Intern](https://theintern.github.io/intern/#writing-functional-test). It should be mentioned though that v4.2.16 has an incompatibility with at least [tap](http://www.node-tap.org/) v7.1.2: stdout/stderr written during a run gets lost.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
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.
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.
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.
Pro Works with any testing framework or assertion library
WebdriverIO lets you use your favorite testing framework (Jasmine, Mocha, Cucumber) and assertion library (Chai for Mocha). Other projects implement their own testing and assertion APIs, for example Nightwatch, Intern.
It should be mentioned though that v4.2.16 has an incompatibility with at least tap v7.1.2: stdout/stderr written during a run gets lost.
Pro Used by Chimp.js
Chimp.js, is an emerging web application test framework that implements easy sync tests using WebdriverIO, CucumberJS and Chai. Features include:
- synchronous style
- built-in "widget framework" (an implementation of the PageObject pattern)
- automatically downloads dependencies (ChromeDriver, PhantomJS etc.)
- works with SauceLabs and BrowserStack (CrossBrowserTesting TBD)
- automatically takes screenshots on failures
- works on Windows in addition to Linux and OS X
- automatically produces boilerplate code for step definitions, which you can copy, paste and edit
- file watcher reuses the browser sessions and can run only the tests you tag, to maximize development speed
Pro Excellent API documentation
Pro Synchronous implementation of asynchronous browser commands
So you don't need to worry about promises
Pro Config file generation wizard
Run wdio config
and WebdriverIO will generate a config file for testing locally vs. in the cloud, specifying the test framework (Jasmine, Cucumber, Mocha), where to find tests and store screenshots etc.
Pro Allows you to do visual regression tests using WebdriverCSS
WebdriverIO has a plugin called WebdriverCSS that allows you to do cross visual platfrom/browser tests with an integration to Applitools.
Pro Provides plugins for gulp, grunt and other
WebdriverIO is accessible via gulp and grunt and even has a Sublime Text plugin for autocompletion.
Pro Simpler syntax than selenium-webdriverjs and WD.js
selenium-webdriverjs:
driver.get('http://www.google.com');
driver.findElement(webdriver.By.id('q')).sendKeys('webdriver');
driver.findElement(webdriver.By.id('btnG')).click();
WD.js:
browser
.get("http://www.google.com")
.elementById('q')
.sendKeys('webdriver')
.elementById('btnG')
.click()
WebdriverIO:
client
.url('http://google.com')
.setValue('#q','webdriver')
.click('#btnG')
Pro Used by Meteor's Velocity test runner
If you develop web applications with Meteor.js, you might want to use the xlovio:webdriver wrapper, because it's the Selenium binding behind the preferred testing framework (Chimp) promoted by the Velocity (Meteor's official testing framework) team for using BDD via Cucumber.
Pro Selenium Server need not be started independently
Service is provided by WebdriverIO which over comes the con of starting selenium server independently.
Reference: http://webdriver.io/guide/services/selenium-standalone.html
Cons
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)
Con Must run with WDIO to debug
Tasks written in this beautiful Selenium API can only be debugged using the provided WDIO task runner. You can't set breakpoints within tasks, but you can have WDIO pause the run between Selenium commands.
Con Selenium server must be started independently
selenium-webdriverjs starts the Selenium server automatically, and actually manages to achieve a faster startup time (4 seconds vs. 5.5) than WebdriverIO.