stimulus-use VS ferrum

You can see that I added a dependency here: stimulus-use.

“stimulus-use: Add composable behaviors to your Stimulus controllers, like debouncing, detecting outside clicks and many other things.

Actually, Stimulus is pretty cool because you can compose multiple pre-built behaviors into one Stimulus controller, for a sort of functional approach to component behaviors. The tradeoff is that a growing web of Stimulus controllers (plus HTML data attributes associated with them) can become complex and hard to understand.

The stimulus-use project is a collection of reusable behaviors for Stimulus. If you are familiar with React, this project is similar to React’s hooks system, but for Stimulus controllers.

To make using the IntersectionObserver API easier, we will add the wonderful stimulus-use package to our application. This is not a requirement, but it does simplify the code a bit.

Finally, as we recently added the Stimulus-Use library to our project, we made sure to upgrade it to current beta which supports Stimulus 3.

As you’ll see below, I am importing useClickOutside from stimulus-use, it’s a great library with small, composable helpers, I urge you to check it out!

For example, we have a few ”live search“ fields, backed by back-end Fetch requests, on some pages. The live search function was usually triggered by the keyup event and Cuprite was such a fast typewriter that it frequently sent multiple requests almost at once. If some of the responses got a bit late or out of sync, the front-end JavaScript code began hitting issues. We solved this by adopting a technique called debouncing and, frankly, we should have done this since the beginning. By the way, we used the useDebounce module from the marvelous Stimulus-use library to achieve this.

What are you using for automation? There's a relatively new gem that I heard good things of, vessel: https://github.com/rubycdp/vessel . It uses ferrum under the hood, a set of Ruby bindings to Chrome/Chromium (https://github.com/rubycdp/ferrum).

I've used https://github.com/rubycdp/ferrum as driver for automated testing with capybara for which it works great. It recommends https://github.com/rubycdp/vessel as higher level abstraction for web scraping.

require "Rubygems" require "Ferrum" def generate_card(browser, card, png, options={}) browser.go_to("http://localhost:4000/cards/#{card}") # see all the options here https://github.com/rubycdp/ferrum#screenshots browser.screenshot(path: "./images/cards/#{png}", full: true, # final image size is window_size x scale scale: 2) end browser = Ferrum::Browser.new(window_size: [800, 418]) # Check what cards we need to make Dir.glob("_posts/*").each do |post| post = File.basename(post, ".md") png = post + ".png" card = post + ".html" generate_card(browser, card, png) unless File.exists?("./images/cards/#{png}") end

That is why we were happy to find out that a new ruby testing driver approach is being developed. It is called Cuprite, it runs the Ferrum library under the hood which, in turn, is an API that directly instruments the Chrome browser using the Chrome DevTools Protocol (CDP). About a week ago, we finally made a serious attempt to make our system test suite run on Cuprite, with especially two questions in our minds:

I've used Ferrum for a couple small scripts in the past before.

Ferrum