ava vs mocha
Side-by-side comparison of ava and mocha
- Weekly Downloads
- 580.2K
- Stars
- 20.9K
- Gzip Size
- 942 B
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 3mo ago
- Open Issues
- 63
- Forks
- 1.4K
- Unpacked Size
- 289.4 kB
- Dependencies
- 1
- Weekly Downloads
- 12.1M
- Stars
- 22.9K
- Gzip Size
- 95.1 kB
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 1d ago
- Open Issues
- 226
- Forks
- 3.1K
- Unpacked Size
- 2.3 MB
- Dependencies
- 19
Download Trends
Verdict
Ava is designed for developers seeking a fast and concurrent test runner, particularly for projects utilizing asynchronous code. It excels in environments where performance and minimalistic design are priorities, appealing to those with a preference for TAP (Test Anything Protocol) style assertions.
Mocha, on the other hand, is more flexible and widely adopted in diverse testing scenarios, supporting both BDD and TDD styles. Its extensive ecosystem and large community make it well-suited for larger teams or projects with varying testing requirements, especially when leveraging additional plugins or reporters.
For developers transitioning from one framework to another, it is important to consider the different paradigms and setups each framework offers, as well as Mocha's larger size and overhead due to its extensive feature set, which may lead to longer setup times compared to Ava's lean approach.
Detailed Comparison
| Criteria | ava | mocha |
|---|---|---|
| License | Utilizes the MIT license, ensuring freedom to use and modify. | Also uses the MIT license, promoting similar use cases. |
| Version | Current version is 6.4.1, relatively stable. | ✓Latest version 11.7.5 shows active maintenance. |
| Description | Focuses on confidence in development with an emphasis on performance. | Offers a fun and simple testing experience, accommodating various styles. |
| Ease of Use | May have a steeper learning curve for new users unfamiliar with its features. | ✓Generally easier for beginners, with simpler syntax and setup options. |
| Open Issues | ✓62 open issues show a manageable amount of outstanding concerns. | 225 open issues indicate a larger number of user-reported problems. |
| GitHub Forks | 1.4K forks suggest moderate community contributions. | ✓3.1K forks indicate significant community activity and customizations. |
| GitHub Stars | 20.9K stars reflect a solid developer interest. | ✓22.9K stars indicate a slightly more popular choice among developers. |
| Unpacked Size | ✓Compact size at 289.4 kB, allowing for faster installations. | Larger size of 2.3 MB may impact installation speed due to more features. |
| Weekly Downloads | Lower at 558.2K, indicating niche usage. | ✓High at 12.0M, demonstrating broad adoption. |
| Community Support | Active community but smaller compared to Mocha. | ✓Larger community offers more resources and third-party tools. |
| Bundle Size (gzip) | ✓Minimal at 942 B, favoring performance in bundling. | More substantial at 95.1 kB, which may affect load times in tests. |