|
Yes, I have. Although not as inventive as MW, I have gotten it to work on a W10 VM running on a Ubuntu host. I could say more but my W10 VM is busy updating.
(only old people can do things like this) 
Rules for playing Javascript frameworks.
1. You can't win.
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't get out of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone ever tried to test JavaScript?
Which testing framework to use... Jasmine, Intern, Mocha, QUnit, Cucumber... Wait, some can be customized with assert libraries such as should.js, expect.js or chai. Do they come with spy and mock libraries or do I need to setup Sinon.js, testdouble or JSMockito? And my test frameworks come with other plugins, such as reporters, as well.
So anyway, I've made my choice and set things up, now for the test runner... Karma, Wallaby, Ava, Chutzpah.
Now I also want Selenium, but that does not work in my test framework out of the box? I can use Nightwatch with Selenium and Karma with Nightwatch, or WebDriverIO with any test framework I like through some additional plugins, or a tool such as Chimp, Spectron or CodeceptJS that wrap WebDriverIO? But now I need even more plugins for both my test framework and my runner?
And I need even more frameworks to actually automate my tests? Grunt or Gulp, alright...
So let me get this straight, I need at least an automation tool, four or five frameworks, a couple of additional libraries and a shitload of plugins just so I can write and automate some tests? 
Choice is good, but this is insane! 
|
|
|
|
|
 I was under the impression that actually testing JavaScript is against everything it stands for.
(donning flame-proof clothes)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
No, JavaScript is against everything the free and civilized world stands for.
It is the chosen language of terrorists, Hitler and communism.
Unfortunately, like the one ring, it has the power to corrupt people and programming projects and so we still use it to this day.
Testing it is still fine though 
|
|
|
|
|
"Test" and "release" are javascript keywords for the same function.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I always test my JS code... Run it on customers machine... 
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
I never test my JavaScript, when it breaks I just tell my customer to upgrade their browser.
If they're already on the newest browser I tell them to upgrade their OS.
If they're already on the newest OS I tell them to upgrade their hardware.
If, after all that time, still no one has fixed the bug and did an update on production I put them through to customer support.
No way they'll ever escape from customer support, it's a fool proof system
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: when it breaks I just tell my customer to upgrade their browser.If they're already on the newest browser I tell them to upgrade their OS.If they're already on the newest OS I tell them to upgrade their hardware.
Let see you tell these to Airport Authority, Police or Army
Sander Rossel wrote: I put them through to customer support.
And at that point you (the company) starts to pay fine, not fixing the bug in time as promised in the contract (48 hours top)...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: Let see you tell these to Airport Authority, Police or Army
I don't support COBOL at all! 
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: not fixing the bug in time as promised in the contract (48 hours top)
I also tell them it's not a bug, but a feature!
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: Let see you tell these to Airport Authority, Police or Army
Would they use Javascript running in a browser?
For god's sake, don't answer that. 
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: For god's sake, don't answer that
You are correct, there are some things you just don't want to know.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
You are suffering from excess perceived choices. The only remedy is selective inattention.
Hope this helps !
cheers, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
What you describe is rather a community problem than a language problem.
Also unless you want to use a task runner you could also just add it your test automation script to your package.json scripts section - problem solved.
I'm not opposed to what you wrote (I also think that the JS community is developing new tools for solved problems too often instead of making the existing solutions better), but some parts of it sound a little bit unjustified / unfair to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Florian Rappl wrote: What you describe is rather a community problem than a language problem.
Yeah, that's true. Although things would be easier if JavaScript offered any support for anything in the first place. Unfortunately, it offers about what can be expected from 10 days development back in '95.
It's all good that W3C have been making specifications to make it better for about 20 years, but it still feels like JavaScript is just missing out on a lot (especially when you have to support older browsers, but that is another problem).
Florian Rappl wrote: Also unless you want to use a task runner you could also just add it your test automation script to your package.json scripts section - problem solved.
True, but that's also a bit limiting. And of course I do want a task runner, lint the code, test the code, calculate coverage, make reports, minify, run it in my CI environment, etc.
Florian Rappl wrote: some parts of it sound a little bit unjustified / unfair to me
I guess you're right there. It sounds as though I'm attacking the tools, but the tools are pretty good.
It's just pretty hard to get into if you need to read up on all that stuff before you can just run a test.
Decided to go with Protractor for my Selenium tests by the way.
Will check out Nightwatch.js and/or WebDriverIO later as well.
Unit tests is Jasmine with Karma (and played around with Mocha and chai for a bit).
|
|
|
|
|
Protractor seems indeed quite nice - I'll put that on my list for future considerations with any Selenium-based tests. Thanks!
And yes, I do agree - JS suffers a lot from the rushed implementation which left no time for in-detail design discussions. Generally (not only talking about initial design choices, but taking all factors into account), I consider it the "best and worst language" available. It's a paradox.
|
|
|
|
|
Florian Rappl wrote: I consider it the "best and worst language" available. It's a paradox.
I completely agree with you there! And I must confess, the ecosystem, while annoying, makes it even better! 
It's also the language I love to hate the most 
|
|
|
|
|
Your hate will dissipate for silly stuff like this when you start getting laid. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I was really close recently!
Met this chick at the club, brought her to my place.
While we were getting ready she told me to talk dirty to her.
I told her:
var o = {
firstName: null,
lastName: null
};
o.prototype.getName = function () {
return this.firstName + ' ' + this.lastName;
}She left... 
Looking back at it I realized my mistake.
Never talk JavaScript on first dates!
|
|
|
|
|
Imagine that.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
This is CP, making rational and intelligent thoughts and comments about anything we don't like initially is not how it works. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Good luck. From my experience (mainly with Selenium) everything is browser and browser version dependent and basically all of it sucks on way or another.
Sander Rossel wrote: Choice is good, but this is insane!
FTFY.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: everything is browser and browser version dependent and basically all of it sucks on way or another
Yeah, I'm not a big fan of web development either! 
|
|
|
|
|
I'd suggest getting a good book on the subject and follow the path it teaches. It's so popular now that if you sneeze, there's 20 frameworks for that. Impossible to learn that way.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
But I'm writing that book (seriously)!
Learning from books has never been my thing.
I need to get my hands dirty and try out some stuff.
That's also how I like to learn new stuff, by searching and playing around (and sometimes trial and error).
That's the reason why I've always hated school and why I'll never go back to school again, it sucks the pleasure right out of anything!
In fact, I stopped programming in my spare time when I took up on an IT study at the Open University! It took about two or three years until I finally realized school was holding me back.
When I quit I got that drive back that I had before I picked up that study.
I'm glad I didn't do an IT study after high school (I did journalism). If I did IT at school I might never have worked in IT now (like I'm also not working in journalism) 
|
|
|
|
|
I feel ya, I suppose the same thing would apply though, just pick an area to start with and stay with it. And while I can be very pro-book to give someone a head start, learning by trial and error is smart so kudos. Sometimes, you just can't beat experience.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
