Comparison of tools for creating and conducting automated tests
Article Sidebar
Open full text
Issue Vol. 29 (2023)
-
Performance analysis of web applications created in the Spring and Laravel frameworks
Jakub Suchanowski, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik304-311
-
Comparative Analysis of Selected Game Engines
Bartłomiej Szabat, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik312-316
-
Video game performance analysis on selected operating systems
Agata Wrześniewska, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska317-324
-
Analysis of the ergonomics of interfaces of popular e-marketing tools
Weronika Studzińska325-332
-
Research on User Experience during Interactions with Mobile Applications for Diabetics
Przemysław Bajda, Rafał Baliński, Mariusz Dzieńkowski333-340
-
Performance analysis of React v. 18.1.0 and Angular v. 11.0.2 development frameworks
Analiza wydajności szkieletów programistycznych React v. 18.1.0 i Angular v. 11.0.2Albert Poniedziałek, Beata Pańczyk341-345 -
A comparative analysis of the Flutter and React Native frameworks
Mateusz Markowski, Jakub Smołka346-351
-
Performance analysis of REST API technologies using Spring and Express.js examples
Maciej Wicha, Beata Pańczyk352-359
-
A performance analysis of a cloud database on mobile devices
Sylwester Kot, Jakub Smołka360-365
-
Face Recognition using Deep Learning and TensorFlow framework
Makrem Beldi366-373
-
Comparison of tools for creating and conducting automated tests
Grzegorz Wojciech Bielesza, Mariusz Dzieńkowski374-382
-
Comparison of application container orchestration platforms
Adam Pankowski, Paweł Powroźnik383-390
-
A study of the user experience while working with mobile applications cooperating with sports bands
Szymon Czopek, Mariusz Dzieńkowski391-398
-
Comparison of Machine Learning Algorithms on Classification of Covid-19 Cough Sounds Using MFCC Extraction
Mohammad Reza Faisal, Muhammad Thoriq Hidayat, Dwi Kartini, Fatma Indriani, Irwan Budiman, Triando Hamonangan Saragih399-404
-
Comparative analysis of package managers Flatpak and Snap used for open-source software distribution
Grzegorz Jan Cichocki, Sławomir Wojciech Przyłucki405-412
-
Analysis of the impact of using containerization techniques on application performance in Python
Kacper Chołody, Sławomir Przyłucki413-420
Main Article Content
DOI
Authors
grzegorz.bielesza@pollub.edu.pl
Abstract
The presented work includes a comparison of three tools for preparing and conducting automated tests - JUnit5, TestNG and Spock. The study, on the basis of which the comparative analysis was carried out, consisted in performing three types of experiments, i.e. performance tests based on five test scenarios, functional tests checking the capabilities of each tool, and tests of popularity and support in the modern context. The performance experiment consisted in configuring the test environment, preparing tests based on scenarios, performing them multiple times, and then verifying and analysing the obtained time results. The comparison of tools capabilities was based on the preparation of a set of key functionalities of the software used to develop tests. The last analysis consisted in comparing the popularity of the surveyed platforms, and was performed on the basis of three popular websites providing information on user activity within the test tool.
Keywords:
References
R. Torkar, Towards Automated Software Testing: Techniques, Classifications and Frameworks (PhD dissertation, Blekinge Institute of Technology) (2006).
I. B. K. Manuaba, Combination of test-driven development and behavior-driven development for improving backend testing performance. Procedia Computer Science 157 (2019) 79-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.08.144
M. Sharma, R. Angmo, Web based automation testing and tools. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies 5(1) (2014) 908-912.
M. A. Umar, C. Zhanfang, A study of automated software testing: Automation tools and frameworks. International Journal of Computer Science Engineering (IJCSE) 6 (2019) 217-225.
A. Orso, Integration testing of object-oriented software. Dottorato di Ricerca in Ingegneria Informatica e Automatica, Politecnico di Milano, 1998.
D. Gromek, D. Gutek, Analysis and comparison of programming frameworks used for automated tests. Journal of Computer Sciences Institute 17 (2020) 339-344. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35784/jcsi.2097
M. Jain, D. Gopalani, Automated Java testing: JUnit versus AspectJ. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering 11(11) (2017) 1215-1220.
A. Shtokal, J. Smołka, Comparative analysis of frameworks used in automated testing on example of TestNG and WebdriverIO. Journal of Computer Sciences Institute 19 (2021) 100-106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35784/jcsi.2595
H. Kaur, G. Gupta, Comparative study of automated testing tools: selenium, quick test professional and testcomplete. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications 3(5) (2013) 1739-1743.
Article Details
Abstract views: 222
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
