2017 up to now  | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007

(older archive entries before 2007 are not shown here, but included in the onsite-search)

Mailing List - Entries of 2012


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [QF-Test] Default Settings for QFTest / Components Unnamed


  • Subject: Re: [QF-Test] Default Settings for QFTest / Components Unnamed
  • From: Henrik Horneber <Henrik.Horneber@?.de>
  • Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:25:33 +0100

Hi Mike,

I may be missing something essential, but does backing up qftest.cfg not do the trick?

Best Regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Henrik Horneber
Continental AG, IT R&D Tires
Software Engineering
Email: henrik.horneber@xxxxxxxx
Phone: +49-511-976 / 41 93 9
Fax:   +49-511-976 / 30 26
http://www.continental-corporation.com
_____________________________________________
Continental Reifen Deutschland GmbH, Vahrenwalder Str. 9, D-30165 Hannover
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats/Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Nikolai 
Setzer; Geschaeftsfuehrer/Managing Director: Bernd Guenther, Burkhardt 
Koeller
Sitz der Gesellschaft/Registered Office: Hannover, 
Registergericht/Registered Court: Amtsgericht Hannover HRB 204239, 
USt.-ID-Nr./VAT-ID-No. DE264920698
_____________________________________________
Proprietary and confidential. Distribution only by express authority of 
Continental AG or its subsidiaries.






Von:        Preston Michael <Michael.Preston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
An:        qftest-list@xxxxxx
Kopie:        "'Gregor.Schmid@xxxxxx'" <Gregor.Schmid@xxxxxx>
Datum:        15.02.2012 12:05
Betreff:        Re: [QF-Test] Default Settings for QFTest / Components Unnamed
Gesendet von:        qftest-list-bounces@xxxxxx




Hi Greg,

Thanks for your reply. For now we will stick with the default values. I did
have a go trying to use do naming using reflection and using an attribute
name (thanks to Ivan Boelle for support on this) but as you and he suggested
this itself is very problematic due to on the fly creation of components and
the way in which the hierarchy of creation is nopt the same as the hierarchy
of layoyut.

We may try and add a name resolver for some of our classes where they have
an underlying model with a unique ID but we'll do this only if we need to.

We will stick with the defaults values for replay/record for now and see how
we get on. The tests have not been updated for a long time and hopefully
will be more robust after we have finished.

As for the defaults is it possible to be able to reset and potentially save
these within some kind of file as a potential new feature? I ask also for
options like switching errors down to warnings when events happen outside a
thread.

Kind Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Gregor Schmid [
mailto:Gregor.Schmid@xxxxxx]
Sent: 14 February 2012 06:50
To: qftest-list@xxxxxx
Cc: Preston Michael
Subject: Re: [QF-Test] Default Settings for QFTest / Components Unnamed


Hello Mike,

from what you wrote I wonder if you need to tamper with QF-Test's component
recognition at all.

It is quite common that few components have names. Keeping the 'Hierarchical
resolution' setting and the default option values for component recognition
is a good way to start in this case (BTW: The default values are showing in
the screenshots in the manual, just right-click on any option and select
'What's this?' and you should be right there).

Unfortunately your suggestion of using the names of attributes that hold the
component is impossible to implement because at runtime you can't get from
the component to the object that's referencing it - only the other way is
possible. If the hierarchy were built in a way that the parent component
holds all its children as attributes you could use reflection to get all the
parent's attributes - even private ones - and look if any attribute's value
is your component, then use the attribute name, but from my experience this
is a rare case and besides, many components are created on the fly and not
assigned to any instance attributes at all.

I suggest that you take one step back and work with what you get from
QF-Test. If and when that is not sufficient and you run into component
recognition problems, send the run-log and a recording of the changed
component to our support and we'll try to help.

Best regards,
   Greg


Preston Michael <Michael.Preston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Based on a bit more reading and experimenting. I am thinking I need to
> use a Name Resolver. I am wondering if it is possible to make a name
> resolver which if a name is not set will use the attibute name of
> which it is an instance. E.g. For a Class Foo that has an isntance
> attribute of Jpanel called bar, I would like to get "bar". I would
> then like to go further an hierarchically build up a name based on the
> attributes name that this then belongs to. I think this way we could
> have unique names. I know there is then the issue of anonymous
> instances but I don't believe we have many instances of these (though
> if we did how would we know?)
>
> Are there any examples of how to do this? I can see how I can add (for
> example) the dimensions of a JPanel to it's name but can't quite see
> how from a Jpanel I can ask it's instance, what it's name was when it
> was defined within some other class and then potentially recursively call
this until I no longer have a parent.
>
> I'm using groovy other Jython at the moment as it feels more natural
> coming from a java background.
>
> Thanks for the Help,
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> _____________________________________________
> From:   Preston Michael
> Sent:   09 February 2012 19:01
> To:     'qftest-list@xxxxxx'
> Subject:        Default Settings for QFTest / Components Unnamed
>
> Hi,
>
> I've recently started using QFTest (using version V3.4.2) and I am
> trying to look at getting existing tests which have not been ran for some
time to run reliably.
>
> Genrally the majority of the components are unnamed, the application
> consists of many components mostly swing extensions, lots of dialogs
> and also dynamic components markers moving around a screen.
>
> As a start I am trying to play with the settings under the
> Replay->Recognition options. I think I want the tool to bias toward
> using the geometry and not the names. So to start I presume I should
> use "Name override mode" as Plain attribute? It seems that I am curently
getting better recognition when using Hierarchical resolution.
>
> I am currently experimenting with the bonus and penalty values are
> there any recommendations? Also I am unable to set these values back
> to the defaults so have to remember what they were before my changes. Is
there a reset values function somewhere?
>
> Thanks for the help,
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> This email, including any attachment, is a confidential communication
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
> addressed. It contains information which is private and may be
> proprietary or covered by legal professional privilege. If you have
received this email in error, please notify the sender upon receipt, and
immediately delete it from your system.
>
> Anything contained in this email that is not connected with the
> businesses of this company is neither endorsed by nor is the liability of
this company.
>
> Whilst we have taken reasonable precautions to ensure that any
> attachment to this email has been swept for viruses, we cannot accept
> liability for any damage sustained as a result of software viruses, and
would advise that you carry out your own virus checks before opening any
attachment.
--
Gregor Schmid                                Gregor.Schmid@xxxxxx
Quality First Software GmbH                    
http://www.qfs.de
Tulpenstr. 41                               Tel: +49 8171 38648-0
DE-82538 Geretsried                         Fax: +49 8171 3864816
GF: Gregor Schmid, Karlheinz Kellerer          HRB München 140833

This email, including any attachment, is a confidential communication
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed. It contains information which is private and may be proprietary
or covered by legal professional privilege. If you have received this email
in error, please notify the sender upon receipt, and immediately delete it
from your system.

Anything contained in this email that is not connected with the businesses
of this company is neither endorsed by nor is the liability of this company.

Whilst we have taken reasonable precautions to ensure that any attachment to
this email has been swept for viruses, we cannot accept liability for any
damage sustained as a result of software viruses, and would advise that you
carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment.

_______________________________________________
qftest-list mailing list
qftest-list@xxxxxx
http://www.qfs.de/mailman/listinfo/qftest-list