So I have written a bunch of NW tests for our dev environment. Unfortunately, being new to automated testing and to this product I have learned dev is not the same as our prod env. The difference is the dev login button is 'href*="/abc/def"' and prod is 'href*="www.example.com/abc/def". The parents and classes of these elements are too different to try and use.
I am just creating the pages and wondering if there is a way to store the selector with either a wildcard, like when SQL uses %, or a href.contains??
I apologise if none of this makes sense, I am completely fresh to programming in general.
You can click the login button using browser.click(CSS-Selector)
The CSS-Selector should look like this: a[href*="/abc/def"]
So you end up with: browser.click(a[href*="/abc/def"])
The Asterix works as a wildcard wich will look for a substring: additional information about different approaches
Related
Is there a way to reuse steps in our features from "other" step files?
I.e. I have a project with login page, and topbar that I want to test after login:
Got LoginPage.feature and LoginPage.js step file, everything works fine, all tests run correctly.
I would like reuse steps “Given user open TestPage login page” and “When user login using valid credentials” from LoginPage.js in TopBarCmp.feature:
But it always ends with error:
Long time ago I used Specflow(Cucumber for .net) and it was normal to ruse steps with same singatures across all features.
What is correct way of handling that kind of situations, where we would like to use some part that was already automated?
Looks like you can put them either on cypress/integration/common or in cypress/support/step_definitions and they will be available to share across features
this article explains it better https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/part-2-hands-on-test-automation-project-cypress-reis-fernandes
i'm using Protractor and Jasmine and would like to organize my E2E test in the best way.
Example:
There is a set of the tests for check registration function (registration with right credentials, register as existed user, etc.).
I need to run those tests in three different projects. Tests are same, but credentials are different. For one project it could be 3 fields in the registration form, in another one - 6.
Now everything is organized in a very complicated way:
each single test is made not as "it" but as a function
there is a function which contains all tests (functions which test)
there is a file with Describe function in each
in that file there is one "it" which call the function which contains all tests
there is test suite for each project
I believe that there is a practice how to organize everything in a right way, that each test was in own "it". So will be happy to see some links or advice.
Thank you in advance!
Since it's a broad question, i will redirect you to few links. You should probably be looking at page-object model of Protractor. It will help you simplify and set a standard to organise your tests in a way that is readable and easy to use. Here's the link to it as described by Protractor team.
page-object model
However if you want to know why do we need to use such a framework, there are many shortcomings to it, which can be solved by using such framework. A detailed explanation is here
shortcomings of protractor and how to overcome them
EDIT: Based on your comments i feel that you are trying make a unified file/function that can cater to all the suites that will be using it. In order to handle such things try adding a generalised function (to fill form fields in your case), export that function and then require it into your test suites. Here's a sample link to it -
Exports and require
Hope this helps.
Please can someone point me in the right direction for what I'm sure is a simple problem, but is causing me to go round in circles.I have three domains
.com
.com.au
.co.nz
I'm trying to keep a single code base for maintenance.
I've done some manual localisation work to change titles, contact details etc based on the url, using request.original_url and stripping out the relevant parts and setting some constants in the application controller (SITE, EMAIL, TELEPHONE etc).
It all works fine, except for my config.action_mailer.smtp_settings in the production.rb.
These obviously should change so the localised email account is used (info#...com or .com.au etc) but
I can't get the constants to be initialised before the environment is loaded. It makes perfect sense why it's not working, but I have no idea how to fix it.
I've tried putting it in initializers, the application.rb and setting it in the production.rb itself. If I move the code anywhere out of the application controller I get a no method error on request.original_url.
Is there a way of pulling out mailer settings so they can be exposed to variables? Or is the production.rb loaded at app start up and after that is unaffected by the end user.
Also, even though the language is remaining the same should I look at i18n for manipulating the site for these features? or is it not worth the effort for the few variables I want to change.
Thanks in advance.
You can just change settings in runtime:
ActionMailer::Base.smtp_settings[:host] = 'yourhostfromrequest'
You could just change the constants in your mailers, since constants in Ruby are mutable.
I was hoping to make a Rails app usable both as an Engine and as a standalone Application.
Specifically, I have a nascent app which I'd like to plug in to a customer's site, but ideally, I'd like to just as easily use the app as a standalone system. However, if config/environments/*.rb exist in the enginified version of my app, I get an Uninitialized Constant error at the time the app that I'm having take a dependency on my engine starts up; Rails complains that the MyEngineModule::Application constant can't be found in development.rb, which I think is simply a load order issue, since this does NOT occur when I run the app standalone. If I delete development.rb, the original initializers that reference my MyEngineModule::Application complain, so then I tried to delete those, and all is well.
Great, except that the original app doesn't work, since its configuration is gone.
Is there some tweak I can make to the initialization load order (or load paths, in the Engine < Rails::Engine class definition) that would prevent the original configs and initializers from being loaded when in an engine context, and allow me to leave them in place for the app context?
The simpler answer is probably this, but I'm feeling stubborn, and would like to know what it would take to make my original goal possible:
extract the code for MyEngine into an engine, remove the config/environments/* files and config/initializers/* files, and make the client app depend on this.
Make a "new" minimalist app depend on MyEngine, and move the environment files and initializers to NewApp.
Assuming I feel some unnatural compulsion to keep my original application runnable as it was, if I want to prevent the "engine" from loading the "application" configuration, what's the best way to handle that? I presume this is only really a problem during development, because I can prevent the environments/*.rb files from being pulled into the gem itself, but I like being able to test locally while I'm developing the engine and its client app.
Continuing my tradition of answering my own esoteric questions, it seems like one passable alternative is to include a guard clause in the engine's environments/*.rb and the initializers that goes something like this:
if defined? CuteEngine::Application
CuteEngine::Application.configure do
config.whatever = something
end
end
This gets around the problem of having two Rails::Application objects at a relatively small cost. Not very happy about it, but I'll live.
Bumping this for new comers.
Rails 3.1 comes with mountable engines, which sounds like exactly what you are describing. The docs aren't great for converting existing code, but it looks like this will do what you want:
module CuteEngine
class Engine < ::Rails::Engine
isolate_namespace CuteEngine
end
end
In your other app's routes.rb file, you'll add:
mount CuteEngine::Engine, at: "/cuteness"
http://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/engines.html#mounting-the-engine
http://railscasts.com/episodes/277-mountable-engines
I'm looking to add a very simple layer of automated integration testing to our current Continuous Integration setup. (CI currently only checks for build breaks).
Is there a product that will:
From a base URL, spider a site &
report back any 404/500 error codes?
Allow me to add a step to logon, to
be able to spider the authorized
pages?
Bonuses / would-be-nice:
Report JS errors
Report 404s linked from CSS
I've had a quick look at SilkTest & Selenium, and they don't seem to feature quite such a site-agnostic approach. (The logon step is obviously something they can do...)
We're simply wanting to cull out the simplest/dumbest of regression errors, and we have an absolute minimum of time to implement such an automated check - hence the spidering. Ideally the solution can be run on the command line, and output its results in something I can parse into TeamCity (continuous integration package).
Much appreciated.
Here is a list of utilities to look at.
SilkTest should be able to handle your use case, you'll need to write a script that navigates through your page, depending on the complexity of your page, a simple recursive descent might be sufficient. If it gets more complex, you might need some sort of already visited URLs to avoid infinite loops.
As for the results, if you use either Silk4J or Silk4Net which both use xUnit runners to drive the tests, I assume you should be able to get the results into TeamCity.