Take the 2-minute tour ×
Software Quality Assurance & Testing Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for software quality control experts, automation engineers, and software testers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

We use Fitnesse with tens of project-specific fixtures to design the tests. However, writing the correct test is tedious, because of some trivial errors we make:

  • Syntax errors: unclosed tables, incorrect number of columns in table, unclosed comments, etc.
  • Fixture invocation error: incorrect fixture class/package name, incorrect name of fixture parameter/method, etc.

Those are validated when the test is run, but that's defintely too late. Feedback loop is way toooo long.

Is there any editor that would validate my Fitnesse test as I write it?

share|improve this question
    
Don't tell me you've never had this problem with Fitnesse ;-) –  dzieciou Oct 22 '12 at 20:16
    
I think the answer to the problem is no (no such editor), which still does not resolve my problem. Maybe it would be more fair to ask how would you resolve the problems of long feedback loop when writing Fit tests? –  dzieciou Nov 15 '12 at 6:49
add comment

1 Answer 1

Have you tried using the fitness-editor plugin for Eclipse?

If your team maintain the fitness source alongside the project source code using some sort of version control, Eclipse will also let you manage the changes and commits more effectively.

Theres also a plugin for intelij (fitnesse4idea) and for the particularlly adventurous a syntax highligher script for vim

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you! I see those tools do syntax highlighting, so it might help a bit to eliminate some syntax errors. Do they also validate Fixture invocation? Or provide autocomplete functionality for Fixture invocation? –  dzieciou Oct 28 '12 at 9:14
1  
Not that I know of, even in the case of the eclipse plugin, the text based DSL isn't validated against the java annotations/methods that deliver that functionality. It does support some auto complete, but it isn't as rich as it could be. I would imagine this is true for the vim, and probable for the IntelliJ plugin too. –  Toby Jackson Oct 28 '12 at 10:12
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.