# Testing Framework Decision
**Date**: June 30, 2025
**Decision**: Continue using Testify
**Status**: Approved
## Summary
After evaluating testing frameworks for gorev-mcpserver, we have decided to continue using **testify** as our primary testing framework.
## Key Factors in Decision
1. **Already Integrated**: Testify is already used throughout the codebase with 88.2% coverage
2. **Performance**: 152x faster execution than Ginkgo (0.0091s vs 1.386s for 100 tests)
3. **Go Idiomatic**: Aligns with Go's simplicity philosophy and standard testing package
4. **Low Overhead**: Minimal dependencies and learning curve
5. **Excellent IDE Support**: Full debugging capabilities with standard Go tooling
## Comparison Results
| Aspect | Testify | Ginkgo |
|--------|---------|---------|
| Test Execution Speed | ✅ 0.0091s | ❌ 1.386s |
| Current Integration | ✅ Already used | ❌ Would require rewrite |
| Learning Curve | ✅ Simple | ❌ Complex DSL |
| IDE Support | ✅ Excellent | ❌ Limited |
| Go Idiomatic | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
| BDD Support | ❌ Basic | ✅ Full |
## Recommendations
1. **Keep testify** for all unit and integration tests
2. **Consider testify/suite** for shared test setups
3. **Use testify/mock** if more sophisticated mocking is needed
4. **Maintain table-driven test pattern** as currently implemented
## When to Reconsider
Only reconsider this decision if:
- Complex E2E testing scenarios emerge
- BDD-style acceptance tests become necessary
- Team grows and prefers BDD approach
- Performance ceases to be a concern
## Current Test Structure to Maintain
```go
// Continue with current pattern
func TestFeatureName(t *testing.T) {
testCases := []struct {
name string
input interface{}
want interface{}
wantErr bool
}{
// test cases
}
for _, tc := range testCases {
t.Run(tc.name, func(t *testing.T) {
// test implementation using assert/require
})
}
}
```
This decision supports our goal of reaching 95% test coverage while maintaining fast, maintainable tests.
