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