Showing posts with label links. Show all posts
Showing posts with label links. Show all posts

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Pycon 2009: Functional Testing of Desktop Applications

Here is a link to Michael Foord talk at Pycon 2009 in Chicago about functional testing of desktop applications:

Functional Testing of Desktop Applications
Many advocates of unit testing believe that testing desktop (GUI) applications is so difficult as to not be worth it. Not only is it possible, but 'functional testing' (testing an application from the point of view of the user) is an important part of an agile development process.

I watched it yesterday and it is very good!

Friday, September 26, 2008

GUI Testing at Resolver Systems

I'm currently quite busy at work and with my other activities (like photos). That's why instead of writing another chapter of the GUI Automated Testing framework, I point you to the great article of Michael Foord:

Functional Testing of GUI Applications

Michael describes his experiences with GUI automated testing in Resolver Systems.

They use quite similar approach to run the tested application. It is run in another thread but the thread invoking is different. I am not a specialist in threading but I will try to find out more about which way is better or whether there are any catches[1].

They also do not use win32api for simulating user's input. They usually call directly the .NET method responsible for generating the requested event (e.g. PerformClick). That can be dangerous because your test can pass even when user is unable to click the button - the button could be hidden behind another component.

[1] My current problem can be caused by threading. When I run our application from automated testing tool, two buttons overlap. When I run it normally, it is OK. To be it stranger, it occurs only on my PC. I have no idea why...

Update 10/30/2008: I have not found any problem with my way of starting the tested application. I asked my co-workers, searched for articles about threading and found both ways should be similar. [1] is still mystery to me, though.

Update 8/20/2009: Mystery [1] solved - it was bug in our application :-)