Yeah, I’m not surprised. This was quite a while ago and I think that things have changed since I wrote this script/post…
PayPal has something called nemo for E2E tests. But I’ve never used it and I really don’t like Selenium. I’m in the middle of creating a workshop on testing (https://git.io/testing-workshop) which usese Jest for unit and integration tests and Cypress for E2E tests. Cypress is amazing. I definitely recommend you check it out.!
Sure it runs, but I don’t think that it’s acceptable to ship code that relies on ASI. That’s like relying on code that exclusively runs based on exceptions (like code that runs in a catch block). In any case, if you’re not minifying your code, then you have bigger problems to concern yourself with :)
Hey Peter Benjamin,
I think Yargs is much more flexible at describing exactly what I want to have happen. I’ve had to do some really odd things to make commander do what I want sometimes (for example). With yargs this is much more straightforward. Also, I feel like it has a pretty great parser to accept multiples of the same flag, coercion, etc.
Hi Sergey Zarouski!
I’m definitely a fan of minimal API surface area. For more goodness on this watch this talk from Sebastian Markbåge.
I personally appreciate the tradeoffs of having different ways to describe expected results to enable good error messages in tests. If everything were just