JDave vs Wallaby comparison of testing frameworks
What are the differences between JDave and Wallaby?

	JDave http://jdave.org/	Wallaby https://github.com/elixir-wallaby/wallaby
Programming language	Java	Elixir
Category	Acceptance Testing	Intergration Testing, Browser Automation
General info	JDave is a BDD framework for Java JDave is inspired by RSpec and integrates JMock 2 as mocking framework and Hamcrest as matching library. It uses JUnit adapter to launch JDave specifications. This way it is possible to have IDE, build tool and coverage tool support from day one.	Library for end-to-end intergration testing for Elixir apps Wallaby supports concurrent feature testing (i.e multiple tests can run concurrently) as well as browser management
xUnit Set of frameworks originating from SUnit (Smalltalk's testing framework). They share similar structure and functionality.	No	No
Client-side Allows testing code execution on the client, such as a web browser	Yes Front-end behaviour can be tested with JDave	Yes It works well for automated E2E testing; Wallaby also has an experimental Chrome Driver that works well
Server-side Allows testing the bahovior of a server-side code	Yes JDave can test server-side behaviour	N/A
Fixtures Allows defining a fixed, specific states of data (fixtures) that are test-local. This ensures specific environment for a single test	N/A	N/A
Group fixtures Allows defining a fixed, specific states of data for a group of tests (group-fixtures). This ensures specific environment for a given group of tests.	N/A	N/A
Generators Supports data generators for tests. Data generators generate input data for test. The test is then run for each input data produced in this way.	N/A	N/A
Licence Licence type governing the use and redistribution of the software	Apache License 2.0	MIT License
Mocks Mocks are objects that simulate the behavior of real objects. Using mocks allows testing some part of the code in isolation (with other parts mocked when needed)	Yes It integrates JMock 2 as mocking framework	Yes Available through third party libraries like Mock and Mockery
Grouping Allows organizing tests in groups	Yes Specifications can be grouped by tagging them with @Group annotation.	N/A
Other Other useful information about the testing framework