3 ms·
My experience with using Cucumber was mostly positive, but had to be done very carefully or it would become a huge mess of rube goldberg code behind the scenes.
by jlkuester7 3y ago
My experience with using Cucumber was mostly positive, but had to be done very carefully or it would become a huge mess of rube goldberg code behind the scenes. The number of scenarios and steps can become crazy repetitive unless you leverage Rules, Backgrounds, and Scenario Outlines.
Probably the most important thing was that with a lot of test frameworks, having poorly architected test utility code is annoying and more time-consuming, but has a limited blast radius. Hacky tests can be easily isolated from the other test code. In Cucumber, proper architecture and reusability are paramount. If you screw this up, your tests become unmaintainable really quickly!
- jlkuester7 3y agoThe main value I say in it was that our company has some regulatory obligations to: - Maintain documented requirements for ALL CODE FUNCTIONALITY - Maintain tests for ALL REQUIREMENTS - Be able to produce reports for auditors that prove linkage between the requirements and the tests (to prove that all requirements were tested) In this context, Cucumber was really nice since it automatically solved all three of these at once! For general testing purposes, though, I think Cucumber has too much overhead for it to be worth using...
- jaggederest 3y agoYes, those are exactly the scenarios I bring it out for - when someone wants a VERY clear, VERY well defined, completely comprehensive list of every single thing the system can do, and whether they are working today in an automated fashion.