DEV Community

Discussion on: Scoping Jest tests

Collapse
peerreynders profile image
peerreynders

Scoping Jest tests

Why did they have to use a new term?

Traditionally it has always been identified as a suite.

It's almost as if they are trying to create a mental vendor lock-in to make it more difficult to understand any other test automation framework.

  • suite setup: beforeAll
  • suite teardown: afterAll
  • testcase setup: beforeEach
  • testcase teardown: afterEach

before each (global scope)
after each (global scope)
before each (global scope)
after each (global scope)

I think module-global would be more accurate. A truly "global" beforeEach would have to fire before every testcase regardless of suite membership (test file).

Practically each module (test file) acts as a top level suite while describe is used to create nested suites.

I remember coming from xUnit frameworks (and languages that don't support closures) made Jasmine's approach to suite/testcase composition seem quite foreign.

Collapse
dailydevtips1 profile image
Chris Bongers Author

Not sure why they changed the naming, but for me it doesn't make that much of a difference.
Either name it x or z

Collapse
peerreynders profile image
peerreynders

I don't doubt it.

But one of the key insights of Domain Driven Design is ubiquitous language - a concept which applies to most communication in general - don't use multiple terms to refer to the same thing, it creates unnecessary friction and ambiguity where there shouldn't be any.