Fine Code Coverage VS Shouldly

Compare Fine Code Coverage vs Shouldly and see what are their differences.

Our great sponsors
  • WorkOS - The modern identity platform for B2B SaaS
  • InfluxDB - Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale
  • SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews
Fine Code Coverage Shouldly
1 4
484 1,970
- 0.5%
9.4 6.8
about 1 month ago 4 days ago
C# C#
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later GNU General Public License v3.0 or later
The number of mentions indicates the total number of mentions that we've tracked plus the number of user suggested alternatives.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.

Fine Code Coverage

Posts with mentions or reviews of Fine Code Coverage. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2022-03-07.
  • C# development tools
    2 projects | /r/csharp | 7 Mar 2022
    If you start writing unit tests, I highly recommend Fine Code Coverage to see what percentage of your code has been reached by the existing unit tests: https://github.com/FortuneN/FineCodeCoverage

Shouldly

Posts with mentions or reviews of Shouldly. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-03-01.

What are some alternatives?

When comparing Fine Code Coverage and Shouldly you can also consider the following projects:

SpecFlow - #1 .NET BDD Framework. SpecFlow automates your testing & works with your existing code. Find Bugs before they happen. Behavior Driven Development helps developers, testers, and business representatives to get a better understanding of their collaboration

Fluent Assertions - A very extensive set of extension methods that allow you to more naturally specify the expected outcome of a TDD or BDD-style unit tests. Targets .NET Framework 4.7, as well as .NET Core 2.1, .NET Core 3.0, .NET 6, .NET Standard 2.0 and 2.1. Supports the unit test frameworks MSTest2, NUnit3, XUnit2, MSpec, and NSpec3.

MSTest - MSTest framework and adapter

xUnit - xUnit.net is a free, open source, community-focused unit testing tool for .NET.

NUnit - NUnit Framework

ReportGenerator - ReportGenerator converts coverage reports generated by coverlet, OpenCover, dotCover, Visual Studio, NCover, Cobertura, JaCoCo, Clover, gcov or lcov into human readable reports in various formats.

should - Should Assertion Library

Expecto - A smooth testing lib for F#. APIs made for humans! Strong testing methodologies for everyone!

Moq - Repo for managing Moq 4.x [Moved to: https://github.com/moq/moq]

CheckTestOutput - Semi-manual asserts for .NET unit tests

NFluent - Smooth your .NET TDD experience with NFluent! NFluent is an ergonomic assertion library which aims to fluent your .NET TDD experience (based on simple Check.That() assertion statements). NFluent aims your tests to be fluent to write (with a super-duper-happy 'dot' auto-completion experience), fluent to read (i.e. as close as possible to plain English expression), but also fluent to troubleshoot, in a less-error-prone way comparing to the classical .NET test frameworks. NFluent is also directly inspired by the awesome Java FEST Fluent assertion/reflection library (http://fest.easytesting.org/)