As a general rule of thumb, everytime a test fails or has an indeterminate outcome it requires investigation. If you ignore a failing/indeterminate test then you increase the risk of missing or overlooking a bug.
The value of automation is to execute tests that we deem important enough that we want to run them repeatitively, or tests that are executed more ...
Specflow and Fitnesse approach the process of testing in two different ways. The process of passing different inputs into your tests is very much a way of exploring the functionality of what the system can do. BDD however is all about defining scenarios that define exactly what the system should do.
As a result, I would suggest the execution pattern for ...
You certainly can. Both WebClient, or HttpRequest would work well as the 'glue' for this scenario.
Note that I'd probably rephrase your Given/When/Then Statement as something like:
Given the logon page at http://someurl/account/logon
When I post with parameters username='test' and password='123'
Then I am redirected to http://someurl/home
I believe there is no support for multi-dimensional examples tables in Gherkin scenarios as you have described. Also keep in mind what BDD is largely for: being readable to the business. We developers have to be careful not to get too technical in the feature files ;)
That being said, I can think of a couple ways to solve this problem.
1.Write either the ...
The point of the Given/When/Then pattern is that it describes test preconditions (Given), actions (When), and expected results (Then) - very similar to the unit test arrange/act/assert pattern.
In the example you've given the actions are implied: the user navigates to the website. Depending on what's needed to prove the user's access, that could ...
Hope it is not too late to reply.
For data-driven-testing, I prefer SpecFlow's Scenario Outline approach than csv file for a automated test. Why? As a known benefit of BDD, SpecFlow's Scenario Outline brings all of detail in one readable place - your feature file.
Then you can manage your feature behavior and data that you decide to test against in one ...
In my experience, you can't sell new development processes.
The only path I've found which works is to simply start doing it: Only develop with TDD from this point forward. You'll still deliver your code on time, but it'll be more maintainable and have far fewer bugs. You'll feel much less anxiety and be proud of your work.
After a little time, management ...
The insertion of Thread.Sleep() is typically indicative of a race condition in your test and your test is running out of sync with the thing is it testing.
One suggestion may be to insert a polling loop to wait for the redirect, or an event to indicate the redirect has happened.
See http://www.testingmentor.com/imtesty/?p=652 and read the comments for ...
If you are using SpecFlow look at the Tags Tags description where placing a specific tag before your Scenario allows you to run the specific ones you want. I use @test or @dev for specific User/Functional Tests and when using my NUnit Driver I put in the tag with the /include option. This links in to the SpecFlow feature files such that the following case ...
Rather than accessing the element by Id try doing it with xpath. I can see the there is an tag attached to this element. So you could make use of that.So for example if your checkbox is setup like this:
<div id = "divContainer">
<input class="check-box" data-val="true" data-val-required="The Is Active
field is required."
I was able to fix this by adding stopAfterFailures="-1" to the Execution node in default.srprofile:
<Execution retryFor="None" testThreadCount="1" testSchedulingMode="Sequential" stopAfterFailures="-1" />
I found a workaround for this issue where I can check for the exception after each step using the [AfterStep] binding. This works for me, and tests that failed are now marked as inconclusive:
public void check()
var exception = ScenarioContext.Current.TestError;
if (exception is WebDriverException
Cucumber won't magically make tests from your Gherkin features.
With all those tools you still have to write the step definitions and the code that actually makes the tests happen and maintain it. None of the BDD tools will help you do that and most of them make it hard to exploratory test.
If the acceptance is a sprint level its going to be harder to have ...
It appears that NUnit http://www.nunit.org/index.php?p=testFixture&r=2.5 now supports parameterized test fixtures. This may allow you to create a test that will do what you need. This SO answer has a similar question for NUnit selenium tests.
We have an example https://github.com/techtalk/SpecFlow.Plus.Examples/tree/master/SeleniumWebTest which adds screenshots to the report. Have a look at it.
Full disclosure: I am one of the maintainers of SpecFlow and developer on SpecFlow+
No, the when is the action you are testing.
Why not write it as:
Scenario: User has to open a website
Given Joey (a typical user) that has access to the website
When Joey visits the page
Then Joey is be able to validate the page content
You can technical skip step phases, you can also leave the implementation of a step empty. Sometimes I create ...
You seem good to go with some service testing.
NUnit -> I want to use parallel test methods execution/calling with Priorities using C# similar to TestNG in Java.
Both ideas are actually the same. Arrange is a Setup + Teardown.
Specflow -> Gherkin ...
Add your assertions to the examples table, and reference them in the Then step:
Scenario Outline: Verify bla bla
Given run I ... with <jj>,<kk>,<ll>
Then verify the following: <aa>, <bb>, <cc>
| jj | kk | ll | aa | bb | cc |
| m | n | o | d | e | f ...
Your specflow file should look like this:
Then the Details page should display the rating zip code
And the Details page should display
| Parameter | Value |
| ID | 5 |
| Employee Count | 125 |
And your code should look like this:
[Then(@"the Details page should display")]
public void DetailsPageShouldDisplay(Table ...
In your case I don't think BDD (or its cousin TDD) is necessarily the right tool for what you are doing.
Rather than developing application code based on desired behavior as captured in tests, it sound like you already have the application code and want to address the technical debt of not having test coverage for it, i.e. technical debt - missing tests.
Benefits of gherkin non-automated:
Has rigid structure (given/when/then, steps and tables)
Can be more familiar to QA and DEV
Easy to put to source control and review changes as textual diffs
Can be eventually supplied with a glue which would execute those specs against an implementation or a model of such. Although most of the time that would still ...
You will have to change the environment based on the parameter from the Gherkin file.
Given The actor logs in the "environment" environment with "username" and "password".
I do not know how to escape tags in these posts, so change the " with tags.
| firstname | username | password | environment |
| Cam | Newton | 12345dev ...
Every Example in a Gherkin file will execute as a test.
So when you want to use every user credential you would also have to switch the environment via the Gherkin file. In this way every test will execute with the right credentials.
So when you want to execute different logins from a gherkin file you also have to switch environments via the Gherkin file.
I would consider breaking it up into Patient Info and Physician Verification.
You mention tabs - can these windows be accessed separately? I would try and treat them separately in separate specs if at all possible.
My very personal opinions, please take them as a grain of salt
In public class LoginStepDefinitions
public LoginStepDefinitions(IWebDriver _driver)
driver = _driver;
static IWebDriver driver;
why do you declare driver after it is used this class constructor? It may confuse a reader a bit.
You are using FindsBy(How = ...
Although the technical answer to your question is no, there are some methods which help you limit the number of scenarios you need to cover to provide suitable coverage.
I particularly like the Pairwise methodology
Luckily there is a (no longer free) tool called Hexawise that helps you make sense of it without a mathematics degree!
A particularly simple ...
I use Spinach and write tests in Ruby but I face the same issues when writing my tests - looks like managing page object context across the steps is a common problem when using Cucumber-like BDD frameworks. I think one can hardly find a perfect and universal solution for this one. All of them have their pros and cons. I tried several approaches (the code ...
I found out that you can filter tests in the Default.srprofile, for example
will only run tests with the tag @myTag.
More info is provided here: http://www.specflow.org/media/specrun.html#US18