GenFu
Stryker.NET
Our great sponsors
| GenFu | Stryker.NET | |
|---|---|---|
| - | 14 | |
| 822 | 1,707 | |
| - | 1.5% | |
| 0.0 | 9.4 | |
| over 1 year ago | 2 days ago | |
| C# | C# | |
| GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | Apache License 2.0 |
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.
GenFu
We haven't tracked posts mentioning GenFu yet.
Tracking mentions began in Dec 2020.
Stryker.NET
-
Stryker.NET alternatives - Testura.Mutation, visualmutator, fettle, and Faultify
5 projects | 9 Jun 2023
-
Do you guys mock everything in your Unit Tests?
Bogus - For creating fake data Verify - Snapshot testing for .NET MELT - For testing ILogger usage Stryker - Mutation Testing for .NET TestContainers - run docker programmatically in integration tests
-
Scope of unit testing (karma/Jas) Boss wants unreasonable testing?
This is called mutation testing btw.
-
Don't target 100% coverage
Let's try it on our small example using Stryker.
- PhD'ers, what are you working on? What CS topics excite you?
-
Killing mutants to improve your tests
There are tools that do this automatically, stryker[2] is one of them. When you run stryker, it will create many mutant versions of your production code, and run your tests for each mutant (that's how mutations are called in stryker's' documentation) version of the code. If your tests fail then the mutant is killed. If your tests passed, the mutant survived. Let's have a look at the the result of runnning stryker against reffects-store's code:
-
Not sure if popular opinion: Greenfield projects should have 100% test coverage.
Mutation testing is pretty solid. Better than code coverage for sure. Using Stryker personally.
-
Seriously what are they and why does everyone hate them?
A mutation testing tool (like Stryker) runs your unit tests to verify they all pass then makes a small change (mutation) to your code and reruns the tests. At least one test should fail because the modified code should behave differently.
-
Relesed v1.0.0 of my pet javasscript project yesterday after hitting 100% coverage- a gesture detection library
I haven't tried it yet, but last time I researched it, this is the library that looked most promising: https://stryker-mutator.io/
-
Mutation Testing in NodeJS
Website: https://stryker-mutator.io/
What are some alternatives?
Bogus - :card_index: A simple fake data generator for C#, F#, and VB.NET. Based on and ported from the famed faker.js.
xUnit - xUnit.net is a free, open source, community-focused unit testing tool for .NET.
AutoFixture - AutoFixture is an open source library for .NET designed to minimize the 'Arrange' phase of your unit tests in order to maximize maintainability. Its primary goal is to allow developers to focus on what is being tested rather than how to setup the test scenario, by making it easier to create object graphs containing test data.
sharpfuzz - AFL-based fuzz testing for .NET
Moq - Repo for managing Moq 4.x [Moved to: https://github.com/moq/moq]
FsCheck - Random Testing for .NET
MSTest - MSTest framework and adapter
NBomber - Modern and flexible load testing framework for Pull and Push scenarios, designed to test any system regardless a protocol (HTTP/WebSockets/AMQP etc) or a semantic model (Pull/Push).
FakeItEasy - The easy mocking library for .NET
should - Should Assertion Library