Test::Unit vs unexpected comparison of testing frameworks
What are the differences between Test::Unit and unexpected?

Test::Unit

https://test-unit.github.io/

unexpected

http://unexpected.js.org/
Programming language

Ruby

JavaScript

Category

Unit Testing, Intergration Testing

Unit Testing

General info

Test::Unit is a unit testing framework for Ruby

Test::Unit is an implementation of the xUnit testing framework for ruby which is used for Unit Testing. However Test::Unit has been left in the standard library to support legacy test suites therefore if you are writing new test code use Minitest instead of Test::Unit

An extensible BDD assertion toolkit

Unexpected is an extensible BDD assertion toolkit that is compatible with all test frameworks,is Node.js ready (require('unexpected')) and supports asynchronous assertions using promises among other features. It can be used with any test runner that catches exceptions, but the developer recommends Mocha, Jest or Jasmine as they are integrated tested with every release
xUnit
Set of frameworks originating from SUnit (Smalltalk's testing framework). They share similar structure and functionality.

Yes

test-unit is a xUnit family unit testing framework for Ruby

N/A

Client-side
Allows testing code execution on the client, such as a web browser

It could have tested some front-end components but its now legacy hence wouldn't work with the many new front-end components

Yes

Unexpected can be used in a browser environment to test front-end components and functionality
Server-side
Allows testing the bahovior of a server-side code

Yes

Yes

Unexpected is used in a Node.JS environment to test server behaviour and functionality
Fixtures
Allows defining a fixed, specific states of data (fixtures) that are test-local. This ensures specific environment for a single test

Yes

Fixture methods are available through its ClassMethods Module

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.

Yes

Group fixture methods are supported

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.

No

N/A

Licence
Licence type governing the use and redistribution of the software

LGPLv2.1, Ruby Licence

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)

No

N/A

Grouping
Allows organizing tests in groups

No

N/A

Other
Other useful information about the testing framework