env-js vs HtmlUnit? - Env.js

The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Message from discussion env-js vs HtmlUnit?
Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning mike...@hotmail.com does not designate 195.54.101.73 as permitted sender) client-ip=195.54.101.73;
From: "Mike Wilson" <mike...@hotmail.com>
To: <envjs@googlegroups.com>
Subject: RE: [env-js] Re: env-js vs HtmlUnit?
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:48:33 +0200
Message-ID: <01fc01ca4b4b$12d57590$0a01a8c0@mikedeskxp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <4AD33993.8090302@yahoo.fr>
Thread-Index: AcpLRjfVO4IxQKBsQgio0WG0YOtYnQABB6vg

Hi Marc,
Env.js has an eventual goal that is hard to achieve with a HtmlUnit-
style (Java) solution; being able to run on different JavaScript=20
platforms, ie Rhino, SpiderMonkey, V8, etc.
Best regards
Mike Wilson

Marc Guillemot wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>=20
> you're right, this is definitely a different purpose but=20
> couldn't it be=20
> achieved using HtmlUnit and extending / wrapping it for this purpose?
>=20
> When I see the latest issues discussed in this mailing list=20
> (UTF-8 BOM,=20
> noscript, usage of Java to better control Rhino, ...), it=20
> really seems=20
> to me that you try to reinvent the wheel. I don't say that=20
> HtmlUnit is=20
> perfect, not at all, but EnvJS will encounter a lot of problems that=20
> HtmlUnit has already had (HTML & CSS parsing, different browser=20
> behaviors, limitations of Rhino, ...) and at the end I fear that the=20
> project will just slowly die like other have done :(
>=20
> Sorry for the pessimistic comment ;-)
>=20
> Cheers,
> Marc.
>=20
>=20
> woody a =E9crit :
> > Hi Marc,
> >=20
> > The main difference for my purposes is that EnvJs allows me to write
> > unit tests in JavaScript to test other JavaScript objects=20
> in my client
> > side code.  HtmlUnit (and please stop me if i got this=20
> wrong) requires
> > that I use a Java API to poke at elements that I find via the Java
> > API.  Typically an event handler execution might kick off a whole
> > bunch of JavaScript and object interaction, so far as I can=20
> see EnvJs
> > has the advantage of allowing the possibility of finer grained
> > testing.  e.g. I might have 10 objects that interact to deal with an
> > onclick handler, ideally I want to be able to test each one in
> > isolation, HtmlUnit can test that at the end of the onclick handler
> > the right or wrong things happen, but it doesn't offer me a=20
> way to run
> > tests against each individual object involved in arriving=20
> at that end
> > point.
> >=20
> >=20
> > HTH
> > Cheers,
> > Steve.
> >=20
> > On Sep 29, 4:11 pm, Marc Guillemot <mguille...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> >> Thanks for the explanation.
> >>
> >> I have surely a biased view on it, but as I know how many=20
> work has been
> >> done in HtmlUnit and what remains, I have a good idea of=20
> all the work
> >> that you'll have :(
> >>
> >> In the past I had contacted the crosscheck project to see=20
> if we could
> >> find some areas where we can have a common effort but I=20
> have never had
> >> any answer and the project seems dead.
> >>
> >> Feel free to contact me if you find that some interaction=20
> with HtmlUnit
> >> could be interesting for both projects.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Marc.
> >> --
> >> Web:http://www.efficient-webtesting.com
> >> Blog:http://mguillem.wordpress.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> chris thatcher wrote:
> >>> Marc sorry I didn't respond, It was more a case of 'I=20
> needed to go read
> >>> about it before I could respond' but then kept getting=20
> side tracked. =20
> >>> HtmlUnit looks great, probably the only differences worth=20
> noting are
> >>> that envjs is written almost entirely in javascript=20
> instead of java so
> >>> javascripters may prefer to hack on it since they would be more
> >>> comfortable with the source.   Also, so far, envjs has no=20
> stated goal of
> >>> emulating particular browsers, rather we just provide=20
> both the w3c and
> >>> ie interfaces when appropriate and don't really have=20
> modes for each.
> >>> Thanks for the post, I'll try to look at htmlunit further.
> >>> Thatcher
> >>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:25 AM, Marc Guillemot=20
> <mguille...@yahoo.fr
> >>> <mailto:mguille...@yahoo.fr>> wrote:
> >>>     Nobody can (or want to) answer?
> >>>     Cheers,
> >>>     Marc.
> >>>     On Sep 23, 7:10 am, Marc Guillemot <mguille...@yahoo.fr
> >>>     <mailto:mguille...@yahoo.fr>> wrote:
> >>>      > Hi,
> >>>      > just curious: how does env-js compare to HtmlUnit?
> >>>      > Particularly:
> >>>      > - which browser does env-js simulate?
> >>>      > - how does env-js handle limitations of Rhino, for instance
> >>>     concerning
> >>>      > RegExp?
> >>>      > Cheers,
> >>>      > Marc.
> >>>      > --
> >>>      > Web:http://www.efficient-webtesting.com
> >>>      > Blog:http://mguillem.wordpress.com
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher Thatcher
> > >=20
> >=20
>=20
>=20
> >=20
>=20
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Account Options
