chai.should();
foo.should.be.a('string');
var expect = chai.expect;
expect(foo).to.be.a('string');
var assert = chai.assert;
assert.typeOf(foo, 'string');
Seriously? If this is not a major reason of js fatigue I don't know what is. chai.should();
foo.should.be.a('string');
var expect = chai.expect;
expect(foo).to.be.a('string');
var assert = chai.assert;
assert.typeOf(foo, 'string');
Seriously? If this is not a major reason of js fatigue I don't know what is.For Chai, I also found RSpec/Jasmine/Chai styled testing is not much different from Minitest/Xunit/Tape test. Meanwhile, there was a hype of advertising so-called BDD interface several years ago.
But there are still a lot of people testing detailed implementation instead of business value with RSpec styled testing framework.
There are several things are pretty similar, I'm sure there's more:
* Pretending BDD with RSpec styled testing, instead of testing business invariant.
* Pretending continuous integration with Jenkins. Instead of incremental value delivery in high frequency.
* Pretending agile software development with Jira and abused task-splitting. Instead of preserving e2e business value in one task.
Your critique isn't focused on JS fatigue but a single lib. JS fatigue is about having to choose between Chai, Mocha, Karma (dead nowadays?), Tape, Istanbul, testdouble, Qunit etc. And also: knowing what does what.
I am not criticising the design choice but rather the inability to make a choice.
> JS fatigue is about having to choose between Chai, Mocha, Karma...
And once you made that choice you still have to choose between three different api styles, apparently.