briandunn
How does this compare to the parallel_tests gem?
Hi, I'm interested to know how this compares to the parallel_tests gem? I'm currently using that and wondering if flatware would give me faster specs, or whether both repos take a similar approach and so have similar characteristics. Thanks
I don't have metrics to show you. But in the past when I compared parallel_tests implementation vs flatware implementation, i found that flatware was faster.
output
When I started this project parallel_tests didn't have a "summary logger" for rspec - the output was jumbled and messy. It looks like when output is written to a file this is solved, but for command line running on your dev machine this may still be an issue.
focused gems
flatware only supports two frameworks, and each is split into their own gem. So users get only the code they need, and maintainers have clear boundaries for their code.
performance
Not sure about the performance advantage. It would be nice to highlight that if one still exists - we would need comparisons across a variety of projects to be able to make an honest assertion.
Flatware was focussed on local runs with pretty output. Now it also seems useful for speedups in some CI environments. Similar results can probably be achieved in both cases with parallel tests. What I can assert is that if you are looking for fast, clean, reliable local rspec runs then you and I share a use case and flatware will strive to be a great choice.
