Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [perlguitest] Re: Win32-GuiTest v1.50.3-ad (Release)

Expand Messages
  • Gabor Szabo
    ... You are welcome :) I think *both* should be there, that s what I usually do with software I am testing. But in any case, if you have the tuits to develop
    Message 1 of 8 , Feb 14, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, pkaluski wrote:

      > I tend to disagree with you.
      You are welcome :)

      I think *both* should be there, that's what I usually do
      with software I am testing.

      But in any case, if you have the tuits to develop the
      application to be tested then go ahead and do it and let's
      leave it for Dennis to decide what to include in the distro.

      The more test we have the better.

      Gabor
    • pkaluski
      Well, I did not expect, that I find the example of windows version inconsistency so quickly. Units test made on calculator fail. This is due to the fact, that
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 15, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Well,
        I did not expect, that I find the example of windows version
        inconsistency so quickly.

        Units test made on calculator fail. This is due to the fact, that
        calculator on win2k will write 1969 as "1969. ". On XP it will be
        "1,969. ". There are also differences in formating binary and octal
        numbers.

        -Piotr

        --- In perlguitest@yahoogroups.com, "pkaluski" <pkaluski@p...> wrote:
        >
        > --- In perlguitest@yahoogroups.com, Gabor Szabo <gabor@p...> wrote:
        > > On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, pkaluski wrote:
        > >
        > > > Hi,
        > > > I think we should consider creating an application, which would
        > be a
        > > > target for Win32::GuiTest unit tests. Relying on notepad or
        other
        > M$
        > > > stuff is risky, because these applications change too often.
        > > > It would be easier to maintain tests if we have one
        application,
        > which
        > > > hosts most of controls we would like to test.
        > >
        > > That could be *in addition* to the tests against notepad and co.
        > > I belive for real good tests we should also use real and changing
        > > targets.
        > > Usually I like to have two kinds of tests:
        > > one with data that I control - the application you suggest
        > > one with data from the wilde - the kind we have now
        > >
        > >
        > I tend to disagree with you.
        > IMHO, testing against special test application should not be an
        > addition. It should be a core, the main part of the regression test
        > suite. Here are my reasons:
        > 1. Win32::GuiTest is controls oriented, not application oriented.
        > What I mean is that is uses the notion of controls rather than
        > applications. It operates on controls. Therefore it seams more
        > natural to make test controls oriented, rather then application
        > oriented.
        > 2. If our goal is to make a portable, widely used and trusted
        module,
        > we have to create a test suite, which should pass on every system
        we
        > declare.
        >
        > I do agree that it would be good to have tests for real
        applications,
        > but I don't think we have resources to maintain test scripts and
        make
        > sure that tests pass on Win2K and on WinWhatSoEver. What if notepad
        > in WinWhatSoEver is redesigned and uses different set of controls?
        > At current stage, I believe that creating stable, easy to run test
        > suite is more important than making sure that GuiTest work for
        > particular application.
        >
        > -Piotr
      • Gabor Szabo
        ... Is this difference due to a change in the application itself or is it because of a change in an underlying control that might be used by other applications
        Message 3 of 8 , Feb 18, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, pkaluski wrote:

          >
          >
          > Well,
          > I did not expect, that I find the example of windows version
          > inconsistency so quickly.
          >
          > Units test made on calculator fail. This is due to the fact, that
          > calculator on win2k will write 1969 as "1969. ". On XP it will be
          > "1,969. ". There are also differences in formating binary and octal
          > numbers.

          Is this difference due to a change in the application itself or is
          it because of a change in an underlying control that might be used
          by other applications as well ?


          I would add a conditional to the test checking the version
          of Windows and based on that decide what is the expected string.

          Gabor
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.