Is it possible to use JGiven (with or without Spring support) to retrieve the statements before / during execution? For example, if we had a fairly typical login acceptance test i.e.
public class LoginFeatureTest extends SpringScenarioTest<GivenIAmAtTheLoginPage, WhenILogin, ThenTheLoginActionWillBeSuccessful> {
#Test
public void my_login_test() {
given().I_am_a_new_user()
.and().I_am_at_the_login_page();
when().I_login_with_username_$_and_password_$("dave", "dave123");
then().the_home_page_is_visible();
}
}
Is it possible to get something access to the following information?
My Login Test (start)
Given I am a new user
and I am at the login page
When I login with username dave and password dave123
Then the home page is visible
My Login Test (end)
i.e. what i'm looking for is: -
The name of a scenario method + all it's given, when, then and and statement calls _(formatted via JGiven formatting).
When each scenario method starts at run-time.
When each given, when, then and and executes at run-time.
When the scenario method ends.
This will give me the ability to visually show in a UI (a) exactly what is going to execute and (2) it's current position during execution (with durations).
12:00:01.012 [ My Login Test (start) ]
12:00:02.035 23ms Given I am a new user
12:00:02.051 16ms and I am at the login page
----> When I login with username dave and password dave123
Then the home page is visible
[ end ]
I'm thinking Spring AOP might come to the rescue here? Or does JGiven provide anything useful buried in it's code?
At the moment there is no possibility to do that. I have created an issue for that: https://github.com/TNG/JGiven/issues/328.
It should not be too difficult to implement this as there is internally already a listener concept. If you are still interested you could propose an API and integrate the mechanism in JGiven.
Related
#client.command(brief="Send a message with a button!")
async def button(ctx,interaction: discord.Interaction):
view = discord.ui.View()
style = discord.ButtonStyle.gray
item = discord.ui.Button(style=style, label="Read the docs!", url="https://discordpy.readthedocs.io/en/master")
view.add_item(item=item)
await interaction.response.send_message("This message has buttons!", view=view)
await interaction.response.send_message(content="Hi", ephemeral=True)
discord.ext.commands.errors.MissingRequiredArgument: interaction is a required argument that is missing.
Actually i just want to send a message by intraction, but seem itwasn't work :(
I think you are confused about the basic concepts since your code is mixed up command and interaction stuffs.
If you want to create button, you cannot write in the older command way like #client.command. You need to either use application command or hybrid command (which is a mix of interaction and command)
So, you should never have something like (ctx: Context, interaction: Interaction) together.
Also, classically, you need to create a view class and create a button inside this view class. Then you can attach this view to your message or embed when you send this to the user.
And, if you want to respond to user multiple times in a application command, you cannot do that through interaction.response (only once). You can use interaction.followup() for later responses. link
For view examples, see file example under this
For slash command (application command) example, see this
I need to be able to prompt for user input (username, password and authorisation code) so my tests can access a GUI. These details cannot be stored as test data, so they'll have to be input part way through a test.
I've tried the following, but it's not working how I want:
Feature file:
Feature: user input as part of a test
Scenario: user input at the start
Given the test requires a name
Step definition:
Given(/^the test requires a name$/) do
get_a_name
end
Method:
def get_a_name
puts "Gimme a name"
#input_name = gets.chomp
puts "Hello #{#input_name}"
end
Result:
Gimme a name
Hello Feature: user input as part of a test
Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.
You have a number of options when dealing with external services in test automation. In this particular case you can
Change your source so the authentication behaves differently when testing
OR
Record a response from the external service and use that response instead of going to the external service (see https://github.com/vcr/vcr). As the response is recorded you will know the authorisation code
OR
Use a test version of the external service which gives back know responses
I suspect there are a number of other solutions, but all three of the above are used widely and work fine.
There is certainly no need to have manual interactions to test your system unless you are running your tests against a production system (which is a very bad idea!).
Here as you can see I am trying fetch a value from .yml file located in config/environments in Examples: table.
But instead of fetching it is sending the value as it is?
Is it possible to pass parameter like this? If Yes, how?
If not, which Ruby or Cucumber feature/concept refrains user to do so and why?
Feature: Verify login of all test users
I want to verify all test users can login.
Scenario Outline: Login as different users on the website
Given I am on login page
When I enter "<username>" and password
Then I click Login button
And I see "<user>" successfully logged in
Examples:
|user|username|
|testuser1|#{FigNewton.test1_email}|
|testuser2|FigNewton.test2_email|
First of all this is a pretty poor feature, better would be
Scenario: Test Users can login
Given there are some test users
When the test users login
Then all test users should be logged in
or something like that. Features are for stating what you want to do and why, not how you do things.
IF you do the above then all the programming will be done in the step definitions. This will allow you do do whatever you want.
You can implement this quite easily e.g
Given 'there are some test users' do
#test_users = create_test_users
end
When 'the test users login' do
#login_results = login_each(#test_users)
end
Then 'all test users should be logged in' do
expect(check_for_errors(#login_results).count).to eql 0
end
then implement the methods you need in a step helper e.g
module TestUsersLoginStepHelper
def create_test_users
...
def login_each(users)
users.each do
...
...
end
World TestUsersLoginStepHelper
By putting all the work in the step definitions, you make your live much easier, as you can use the full power of ruby to do what you need
Answer to query1:
You can parametrize via Examples: table but not directly passing value using FigNewton gem because it is a .feature file not a Ruby .rb file.
Answer to query2:
How you do it:
Parametrize and Loop it on username and in you steps definition mention what to do when particular user name found. By this you can easily parametrize.
Examples:
|user|username|
|testuser1|test1|
|testuser2|test2|
Step definition
When(/^I enter "([^"]*)" and password$/) do |username|
case username
when 'test1'
on(LoginPage).user_email = FigNewton.test1_email
when 'test'
on(LoginPage).user_email = FigNewton.test2_email
end
....
....
end
You can use this DDD scenario in project whenever its needed - by using this we do not need to create multiple test cases, it will fetch data value from Example outline.
Feature file : Test case
Scenario Outline: Login to application
When I enter "username>" and "password>"
Then I click Login button
And I see user successfully logged in
Examples:
|username|password|
|abc#gmail.com|Test1234!|
|abc#yahoo.com|Test1234!|
Step definition:
When(/^I enter "([^"])" and "([^"])"$/) do |username,password|
sleep 20
on(Login).email_edit_text_element.send_keys username
on(Login).password_edit_text_element.send_keys password
end
Then(/^I click Login button$/) do
sleep 20
on(Login).login_button_element.click
end
Then(/^I see user successfully logged in$/) do
expect(on(Login).account_bg_cover_element.displayed?).to be_truthy
puts 'Login Success'
end
In ruby file, you have created methods, you are calling that methods in step definition.
It will work. make sure about the name of parameter you are passing.
I have inherited some GEB tests that are testing logging into a site (and various error cases/validation warnings).
The test runs through some validation failures and then it attempts to re-navigate to the same page (just to refresh the page/dom) and attempts a valid login. Using GEB's to() method, it detects that you are attempting to navigate to the page you are on, it just calls refresh - the problem here is that attempts to refresh the last POST request, and the driver displays the
"To display this page, Firefox must send information that will repeat any action (such as a search or order confirmation) that was performed earlier"
message - as the test is not expecting this popup, it hangs and the tests timeout.
Is there a way to turn off these warnings in Firefox webdriver? or to auto-ignore/accept them via Selenium or GEB?
GEB Version: 0.9.2,
Selenium Version: 2.39.0
(Also tried with minor version above: 0.9.3 & 2.40.0)
Caveats:
I know about the POST/Re-direct/GET pattern - but am not at liberty to change the application code in this case
The warning message only causes an issue intermittently (maybe 1 in 5 times) - I have put this down to speed/race conditions whereby the test completes the next actions before the message appears - I know a possible solution is to update tests to wait for message to appear and then accept, but my question is, is there a global setting that can just avoid these being triggered/displayed?
That refresh() is there to work around an issue with IE driver which ignores calls to driver.get() with the same url as the current one.
Instead of monkey patching Browser class (which might bite you somewhere down the line or might not) I would change the url of your login page class. You might for example add an insignificant query string - I think that simply a ? at the end should suffice. The driver.currentUrl == newUrl condition will evaluate to false and you will not see that popup anymore.
If I understand you issue properly this might help. In Groovy you can modify a class on the fly.
We use Spock with Geb and I placed this in a Super class which all Spock Spec inherit from. Eg: QSpec extends GebSpec.
It is the original method slightly modified with the original code commented out so you know what has been changed. I use this technique in several required places to alter Geb behaviour.
static {
Browser.metaClass.go = { Map params, String url ->
def newUrl = calculateUri(url, params)
// if (driver.currentUrl == newUrl) {
// driver.navigate().refresh()
// } else {
// driver.get(newUrl)
// }
driver.get(newUrl)
if (!page) {
page(Page)
}
}
}
I want to reuse some Cucumber steps but can't seem to find the right way.
I want to write a step like:
Given /^I login with (.*) credentials$/ |type|
# do stuff with type being one of "invalid" or "valid"
end
But then have another step like:
Given /^I login successfully$
# call "Given I login with valid credentials"
end
So in testing user authentication I can use the former, but most other places, I can use the latter, and not actually have to repro code.
Is there a way to call that other step, or do I just put the logic in a helper method, and call said method from each task (basically a method extraction refactoring, which, after reading my question makes me believe that's actually the best way anyway)?
Note that the method for calling steps within steps has changed in recent versions of cucumber, which you'll see if you get an error like "WARNING: Using 'Given/When/Then' in step definitions is deprecated, use 'step' to call other steps instead:/path/to/step_definitions/foo_steps.rb:631:in `block in '
". See the cucumber wiki for details.
The gist of the change is that you should now use the step or steps methods.
When /^I make all my stuff shiny$/
step "I polish my first thing"
end
When /^I make all my stuff shiny$/
steps %Q{
When I polish my first thing
When I shine my second thing
}
end
UPDATE: The method described below has been deprecated. The recommended way to call a step from within another step now looks like this:
Given /^I login successfully$/
step "I login with valid credentials"
end
Old, deprecated method (for reference):
You can call steps from other steps like this:
Given /^I login successfully$/
Given "I login with valid credentials"
Then "I should be logged in"
end
If all of the scenarios within a feature require this (or other steps), you can also add a Background to each features, with the common steps, like so:
Background:
Given I log in with valid credentials
Scenario: Change my password
Given I am on the account page
Calling steps from step definitions is a bad practice and has some disadvantages:
If scenario will fail and there are nested step invocations, you will get only the last invoked step definition in the stack trace. It may be hard to find from which place that last stepdef was called
Call to stepdef is sometimes harder to find and read than ruby method
Ruby methods give you more power than calling steps from step defs
Aslak Hellesøy recommends to extract popular actions to World instead of reusing steps. It isolates those actions in one place, makes this code easier to find. You can extract code to usual Ruby classes or modules as well.
#/support/world_extensions.rb
module KnowsUser
def login
visit('/login')
fill_in('User name', with: user.name)
fill_in('Password', with: user.password)
click_button('Log in')
end
def user
#user ||= User.create!(:name => 'Aslak', :password => 'xyz')
end
end
World(KnowsUser)
#/step_definitions/authentication_steps.rb
When /^I login$/ do
login
end
Given /^a logged in user$/ do
login
end
Here is a useful discussion on the subject in Cucumber mailing list - link
Best wrap your steps in %{} rather than quotes. Then, you don't need to escape double quotes which you'll need to use frequently.:
Given /^I login successfully$
step %{I login with valid credentials}
end
Given /^I login with (.*) credentials$/ |type|
# do stuff with type being one of "invalid" or "valid"
end
Reuse keywords in feature file which will provide code reusability.
It is highly NOT recommended to call step defs within step defs.
I would write my feature file this way,
Scenario Outline: To check login functionality
Given I login with "<username>" and "<password>"
Then I "<may or may not>" login successfully
Examples:
|username|password|may or may not|
|paul |123$ |may |
|dave |1111 |may not |
In my step definition, (This is Java)
#Given(I login with \"([^\"]*)\" and \"([^\"]*)\"$)
public void I_login_with_and(String username, String password){
//login with username and password
}
#Then(I \"([^\"]*)\" login successfully$)
public void I_login_successully_if(String validity){
if(validity.equals("may")){
//assert for valid login
}
else
if(validity.equals("may not")){
//assert for invalid login
}
}
In this way, there is a lot of code reusability.
Your same Given and Then handles both valid and invalid scenarios.
At the same time, your feature file makes sense to the readers.