Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Cypress vs SuperTest: What are the differences?
1. Cypress: Cypress is a modern end-to-end testing framework that provides a comprehensive set of tools and features for testing web applications. It allows developers to write tests in JavaScript and execute them directly in the browser, making it easy to debug and troubleshoot issues. One key difference of Cypress is its ability to automatically wait for network requests, eliminating the need for manual timeouts or delays in tests.
2. SuperTest: SuperTest, on the other hand, is a high-level API for testing HTTP servers in Node.js. It provides a simple and intuitive interface for making HTTP requests and asserting responses. Unlike Cypress, SuperTest is specifically designed for testing APIs and does not support testing of user interfaces or front-end components.
3. Cypress: Cypress offers a unique feature called "time-travel" which allows developers to interact with their application at any point in time during the test execution. This enables them to inspect and interact with elements as they change over time, making it easier to debug and troubleshoot issues. SuperTest, on the other hand, does not have this capability as it focuses solely on testing HTTP servers.
4. SuperTest: SuperTest provides built-in assertion libraries that allow developers to easily validate the response received from the server. These assertion libraries include common methods such as .expect(), .toEqual(), and .toContain(), making it straightforward to verify the correctness of the API responses. In contrast, Cypress does not offer built-in assertion libraries and relies on external libraries like Chai or Jest for assertions.
5. Cypress: Cypress has a built-in feature for mocking and stubbing network requests, allowing developers to simulate different responses from the server without actually making the request. This is especially useful for testing different scenarios and handling edge cases. SuperTest, however, does not have native support for request mocking and stubbing and requires additional libraries or custom implementations.
6. SuperTest: SuperTest provides a fluent API for chaining multiple requests together, enabling developers to easily test complex workflows and scenarios involving multiple HTTP requests. This makes it easy to test and assert endpoints that depend on the behavior of other endpoints. Cypress, on the other hand, is primarily focused on testing the user interface and does not provide the same level of flexibility and ease of use for testing complex backend workflows.
In summary, Cypress is a comprehensive end-to-end testing framework that focuses on testing front-end web applications, while SuperTest is a high-level API specifically designed for testing HTTP servers in Node.js. Cypress offers features like automatic waiting for network requests and time-travel debugging, while SuperTest provides built-in assertion libraries and support for chaining multiple requests.
In the company I will be building test automation framework and my new company develops apps mainly using AngularJS/TypeScript. I was planning to build Protractor-Jasmine framework but a friend of mine told me about Cypress and heard that its users are very satisfied with it. I am trying to understand the capabilities of Cypress and as the final goal to differentiate these two tools. Can anyone advice me on this in a nutshell pls...
I've used both Protractor and Cypress extensively. Cypress is the easier and more reliable tool, whereas Protractor is the more powerful tool. Your choice of tool should depend on your specific testing needs. Here are some advantages and disadvantages of each tool:
Cypress advantages:
Faster
More reliable (tends to throw fewer intermittent false failures)
Easier to read code (handles promises gracefully)
Cypress disadvantages:
Cannot switch between browser tabs
Cannot switch to iFrames
Cannot specify clicks or keypresses explicitly as if a real user was interacting
Cannot move the mouse to specific co-ordinates
Sometimes has trouble switching between different top-level domains, so not good for testing external links
Cypress is a newer tool with less extensive documentation and less community support
Protractor advantages:
More powerful because it is Selenium-based - it can switch between tabs, it can handle external links to other domains, it can handle iFrames, simulate keypresses and clicks, and move the mouse to specific co-ordinates within the browser.
More extensive community support and documentation
Protractor disadvantages:
Slower and more brittle - in general there is a higher likelihood of cryptic and/or intermittent errors which may cause your tests to fail even though there is nothing wrong with your application
For highly experienced automation engineers, the fundamental "brittle" nature of Selenium can be worked around - it can be reliable but only if you really know what you are doing
Less graceful handling of promises - relies on async/await or .then to manage the order of execution. Therefore it is a bit harder to read the code.
Harder to set up, and the method of setup impacts its reliability. For example, a hub/node configuration where the selenium jar is on a different physical machine than the browser under test will cause unreliability in your tests. Not everyone knows about this type of thing, so it's common to find Selenium frameworks that are set up poorly.
It's probably better to use Cypress if
you're at a smaller company and have a close relationship with developers who can help write hooks or stubs in their code to assist your testing
you don't need to do things like switch between tabs or test links to external top-level domains
It's probably better to use Protractor if
You might need to switch between tabs or test external links to other domains within the scope of your framework
You want to use a more accurate simulation of how a real user interacts with a browser (i.e. click at this location, type these keys)
You're at a company where you won't have any support from developers in writing hooks or stubs to make their code more testable in a less powerful framework like Cypress
Please try Handow, the e2e tool basing on Puppeteer.
Gherkin syntax compatible
Chrome/Chromium orentied, driven by Puppeteer engine
Complete JavaScript programming
Create test suites rapidly without coding (or a little bit), basing on built-in steps library
Schedule test with plans and arrange stories with sequential stages
Fast running, execute story groups in parallel by multi-workers
Built-in single page report render
Cover page view, REST API and cookies test
As we all know testing is an important part of any application. To assist with our testing we are going to use both Cypress and Jest. We feel these tools complement each other and will help us get good coverage of our code. We will use Cypress for our end to end testing as we've found it quite user friendly. Jest will be used for our unit tests because we've seen how many larger companies use it with great success.
Pros of Cypress
- Open source29
- Great documentation22
- Simple usage20
- Fast18
- Cross Browser testing10
- Easy us with CI9
- Npm install cypress only5
- Good for beginner automation engineers1
Pros of SuperTest
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Cypress
- Cypress is weak at cross-browser testing21
- Switch tabs : Cypress can'nt support14
- No iFrame support12
- No page object support9
- No multiple domain support9
- No file upload support8
- No support for multiple tab control8
- No xPath support8
- No support for Safari7
- Cypress doesn't support native app7
- Re-run failed tests retries not supported yet7
- No support for multiple browser control7
- $20/user/thread for reports5
- Adobe4
- Using a non-standard automation protocol4
- Not freeware4
- No 'WD wire protocol' support3