Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

4
  • 1
    +1 for explaining steps to recreate failed test being intrinsic in the process (your second point) Commented Jul 12, 2011 at 15:45
  • One issue: Doesn't UI unit testing block potential changes in the UI [locks you in]... although I upvoted because you described the benefit in a way where the overall runtime of the application is being monitored by the unit tests rather than an individual component of the system being tested. Commented Oct 5, 2011 at 14:27
  • @monksy - The test suite that we used (I can't remember it's name for the life of me) wasn't co-ordinate based. It was smart enough to use the element ids. So long as we gave all our UI elements names, and kept those names through design revisions the test cases still worked. We paid a pretty penny for that software, but we felt that feature was worth it. Commented Oct 5, 2011 at 20:59
  • 1
    @Tyanna Trust me on this... it was. I've tried to automate UI testing [for regressive testing] based on location. That doesn't work, and is quite frustrating. Btu I was refering to moving components arround, changing out the views/ui, and themeable UIs Commented Oct 5, 2011 at 23:21