2018 up to now | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012

Mailing List - Entries of 2013


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

[QF-Test] Obfuscated classes, Luciad Map use (and JXLayer)


  • Subject: [QF-Test] Obfuscated classes, Luciad Map use (and JXLayer)
  • From: Déborah Vidal <debovidal@?.fr>
  • Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 09:10:32 +0100 (BST)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.fr; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=MVZfeoyRY5WC08zEfe1peyoNKmw4fniOR+pGYrD/4Q1g3oKV4JG0ExmOuyWXz2jQDu6JR3IECuG+nEPyBoIwASKhKnyYxDM4hdziYdCAtJ/diM5pDL4I6OC3iUapayij0nmYl51gxGTe0/hvSjgrYDnPDFQZDOf04087z2qhQMA=;

 Good morning,
 
I have globally two main questions that a member of QFTest adviced me to ask here, in this forum.
 

First, has anyone ever used QFTest with an obfuscated code?

            In fact, a large part of our code is obfuscated and, evidently, we want it to stay like this. Nevertheless, we can know the hierarchy of the obfuscated elements (we just non-obfuscate the code in another window just to have the information, but we don't want to use a non-obfuscated code in our futur tests in QFTest).

So :         - is it possible to access the obfuscated code if we know the entire hierarchy of the component?

                    - we thought about coding a « resolver » taking in entry the mapping file generated by proguard. This, in order to resolve the obfuscated classes. We would like to know if it is a possible solution with QFTest and how many time it would take to make it (we are obligated to give results very soon).

- we also thought about ensuring that this obfuscation does not change from one version to another which  is normally possible with Proguard. But we are not sure that this would resolve the entire problem and won’t be too binding?
 
- Finally, more generally, have you got advices for us or returns of experiences on obfuscation, please?
 
 

 
            Second, have you ever used Luciad maps or similar maps/systems with QFTest?

            Indeed, on our Software, we use Luciad maps.
We saw in the forum that a Luciad employee posted a question (26 Oct 2002 16:03:24) on components snapshots and we wondered if it is the best way to identify components on these maps in order to be capable of getting its own component properties (color, position...).
             In fact, we sent questions to a person of QFTest who adviced us to use an ItemResolver but he was not so sure and told us to ask the question because he does not know for the specific case of the Luciad maps which has particularities :
To be more precise, Luciad gives an environment where the components, which are on the background map, are not really distinguished. In fact, the whole interface (background map + the elements on it) are seen as a single drawing, not as known objects (like JButton, for example).   
Knowing this, have you other recommendations that will permit us to use QFTest with this type of configuration? So, has anybody ever used an itemResolver or other methods with this type of configuration, have you any experience on this?
For it we have two components, one above the other. On the one which is below we would like to access a great number of objects that it contains but it is not possible due to the one which is above. So we do not know how to access this JXLayer which is above : is it possible with QFTest to copy all the objects on the JXLayer on the top or is there any other method to access them?
We have been told by a member of QFTest that it may function with “JLayers” and we would like to know if there are special moduls in QFtest for the "JXLayer" or if anybody has ever used it?
 
 
Thank you very much for your return,
 
Best regards,
Déborah.