There could be several reasons why some people don't follow Cypress.io Best Practices, despite the framework's strong recommendations for maintaining clean, maintainable, and efficient test suites. Below are some common reasons:
1. Lack of Knowledge or Awareness
- Inexperienced users: Many developers or testers who are new to Cypress may not fully understand the best practices or the long-term benefits of following them. They might follow quick, simple approaches that seem to work in the short term but don't scale well.
- Insufficient training: Teams or individuals might not be provided with proper training or resources about Cypress best practices, leading them to miss critical guidelines.
2. Time Pressure
- Short-term focus: In fast-paced environments, there may be pressure to get tests up and running quickly. Writing tests that follow best practices (e.g., creating modular tests, setting up clear fixtures, or following clear naming conventions) can take extra time, which some developers may not prioritize.
- Deadline pressure: When deadlines are tight, developers might opt for quicker solutions that work in the moment rather than long-term solutions that follow best practices.
3. Lack of Testing Culture
- No emphasis on testing: In some teams or organizations, testing may not be considered a top priority, and developers might not value writing tests in a structured, maintainable way. This could result in a lack of discipline when it comes to writing high-quality tests.
- Pressure to deliver features: In feature-driven teams, the pressure to deliver functionality might overshadow the need for robust, reliable test code.
4. Lack of Refactoring or Maintenance
- Legacy code: Many teams start with basic test structures that work for the time being. However, as the application evolves, test code might not be refactored to follow best practices. Test suites that start small can quickly grow messy without ongoing maintenance.
- Ignoring flakiness: Some teams might ignore the importance of fixing flaky tests or maintaining the tests, leading to unreliable and poorly written test cases.
5. Over-Reliance on Defaults
- Not exploring Cypress features fully: Some developers may stick to simple, default configurations in Cypress (like not using custom commands or not separating tests into different files) because they are not aware of the more advanced features that improve test quality and maintainability.
- Global state: Developers might rely on global state for tests, which can lead to side effects across tests, instead of following best practices like using beforeEach for test setup.
6. Misunderstanding Cypress Capabilities
- Testing practices not suited to Cypress: Some testers may come from other testing frameworks or approaches (e.g., Selenium, Mocha) and may apply the wrong mindset. They might try to write tests in ways that Cypress does not optimize for (e.g., making too many assertions in one test, mixing tests for different purposes, or manually managing asynchronous behavior).
- Complexity: Some best practices, such as using Cypress’ API for mocking network requests or structuring tests to isolate concerns, may seem complex or unnecessary to developers who are unfamiliar with them, leading to shortcuts.
7. False Sense of Security
- Tests passing is not enough: Just because tests are passing doesn’t mean the code is written well. Many teams might focus on passing tests without adhering to best practices, assuming that everything works as expected. This can result in poorly written, non-scalable tests that create maintenance challenges down the line.
- Relying on cy.wait() excessively: While Cypress provides many utilities to help control timing, some developers rely too heavily on cy.wait() to get tests to pass, ignoring best practices like proper use of waiting for elements or using cy.intercept() for better control over network requests.
8. Test Case Overload
- Too many tests: Teams may start to write tests for everything without considering test maintainability. They may create large, monolithic test files, leading to slower execution and harder-to-maintain tests.
- Lack of proper test isolation: Some teams might not isolate their tests properly, leading to tests that depend on others, making them difficult to troubleshoot and maintain.
9. Not Using CI/CD with Cypress
- Manual execution: If Cypress tests are not integrated into a continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) pipeline, teams may not be able to easily run tests frequently. This results in tests being ignored or becoming outdated.
- Inefficient test execution: Some teams may not optimize their test runs, and tests may take too long to execute, making developers hesitant to run them, thereby breaking best practices for test execution times.
10. Resisting Change or Overconfidence
- Resistance to refactor: Developers might resist refactoring existing tests to adhere to best practices, even when they are aware of them. They may be overconfident in their current approach and fail to realize the benefits of restructuring the tests.
- Overcomplication: Some developers may feel that following best practices makes tests more complicated or believe that their approach is good enough, even if it doesn’t fully align with Cypress’ best practices.
How to Encourage Following Best Practices:
- Education: Regular workshops, training, or documentation on Cypress best practices can help ensure that developers understand the long-term value of good testing practices.
- Code Reviews: Implementing a strong code review process focused on test quality can ensure adherence to Cypress best practices.
- Test Metrics: Track test metrics like execution time and flakiness to highlight the benefits of following best practices.
- CI/CD Integration: Encouraging the use of CI/CD pipelines to automate tests ensures that they are run frequently and reliably.
- Refactor and Maintain: Establishing a culture of ongoing test maintenance and refactoring to improve readability and performance.
By addressing these challenges, teams can make a stronger effort to follow Cypress best practices and ensure their tests remain reliable, scalable, and maintainable.