kick off testing with test for hasNextPages #3
Conversation
|
|
||
| ```bash | ||
| $ npm run coverage | ||
| ``` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't really include this in the readme as it isn't that important, the people who want to know test results by hand will know npm test anyways.
| @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ | |||
| var chai = require('chai'); | |||
| chai.should(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what advantage does this have over regular should?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The apis are pretty similar. This seems more like a philosophical question, especially since its a dev dependency. I wouldn't say either has a clear advantage over the other. Speed, filesize, and usability are basically the same. Chai is more active in terms of development. Consistency could be an issue since I notice most of the modules in this org use should, but I also haven't seen any of them using sinon.
I typically go with chai because of domenic's awesome https://github.com/domenic/sinon-chai. I had intended to write a few more tests that would've involved using sinon (making sure next() is being called in the middleware function) but took it out since I didn't have enough free time to do it properly. I'd prefer to keep it chai. What do you think? Have you used both?
kick off testing with test for hasNextPages
|
FWIW we are going to be moving away from should entirely (jshttp/style-guide#13).. (edit: well, probably by the looks of it) |
|
@Fishrock123 interesting. You might want to look more into chai's should before switching back to assert. Its been a huge time saver for me. |
|
@esco mind writing your thoughts over there? :) |
No description provided.