Re: [perlguitest] Re: Win32-GuiTest v1.50.3-ad (Release)
- 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.
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
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "pkaluski" <pkaluski@p...> wrote:
> --- In email@example.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
> > > stuff is risky, because these applications change too often.
> > > It would be easier to maintain tests if we have one
> > > 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
> 2. If our goal is to make a portable, widely used and trusted
> we have to create a test suite, which should pass on every system
> I do agree that it would be good to have tests for real
> but I don't think we have resources to maintain test scripts and
> 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.
- On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, pkaluski wrote:
>Is this difference due to a change in the application itself or is
> 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
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.