I need to validate "text box" which does not allow special character,Number more than 10000, and letters,
So my question is how to write in gerkin language ?
Gherkin is not a programming language to have validations. You cannot inject variables into it. However, you can perform the validation in the step definition file and tag it to gherkin.
Scenario: I verify if the characters more than 100
Given I see the text box
And I verify, the text box does not contain characters more than ""
The step definition file
arg !< characters.length
arg is the argument you pass inside the double quotes in gherkin.
Your task is to
Find the value in the text box
The way to do this varies from environment to environment, Selenium may be a good way to interact with your system if it is a web application
Save it in some variable
Validate it against some known value in a step
I have written a few blog posts on how to use Cucumber. This blog post from 2015 may be a reasonable start. The cucumber version is a bit outdated. The process of implementing steps is still valid.
Executable specifications (whether they are in Gherkin format or not) are meant to describe the behavior of the business people. I am pretty confident that not a single business person would talk about the how a single text box should behave.
My advice is to see what the actual business value is about and write the scenario from that perspective. Then the actual testing on this particular text box might not be described in the scenario, but it can be part of the underlying steps implementation.
In other words should the text box suddenly allow for numbers up to a million than the business value probably doesn't change. Therefore the scenario should not change, but the test code behind it might.
Related
I am new in doing an activity and currently, I am trying to draw one based on given description.
I enter into doubt on a particular section as I am unsure if it should be 'split'.
Under the "Employee", the given description is as follows:
Employee enter in details about physical damage and cleanliness on the
machine. For the cleanliness, there must be a statement to indicate
that the problem is no longer an issue.
As such, I use a foreach as a means to describe that there should be 2 checks - physical and cleanliness (see diagram in the link), before it moves on to the next activity under the System - for the system to record the checks.
Thus, am I on the right track? Thank you in advance for any replies.
Your example is no valid UML. In order to make it proper you need to enclose the fork/join in a expansion region like so:
A fork/join does not accept any sematic labels. They just split the control flow into several parallel ones which join at the end.
However, this still seems odd since you would probably have some control for the different inspections being entered. So I'd guess there's a decision which loops through multiple inspection entries. Personally I use regions only for handling interrupts. ADs are nice to a certain level. But sometimes a tabular text (like suggested by Cockburn) is just easier to write and read. Graphical programming is not the ultimate answer (unlike 42).
First, the 'NO' branch of the decision node must lead somewhere (at the end?).
After, It differs if you want to show the process for ONE or MULTIPLE inspections. But the most logical way is to represent the diagram for an inspection, because you wrote inspection without S ! If you want represent more than one inspection, you can use decision and merge node to represent loop that stop when there is no more inspection.
As we write feature file which contains several scenarios, which contains several closely worded, closely meaning step definitions, I am thinking of numbering them. Like if a step 3 of a scenario 2 would be named as s23. I tried doing it like...
Scenario: This is my scenario
Given S21the user has some thing
When S22the user does some thing
Then S23we can make sure some thing is anything.
This is supposedly help me identify the corresponding stepdefinition implementation methods quickly, and console log message linked to the step definitions etc.
But this resulted in the numbering S21,S22, S23 etc., getting treated as integer arguments in the auto generated step definitions. How can avoid that ?
Cucumber is a communication tool, not a test scripting language. Would your business users be able to understand this notation? Would it help them make sense of the scenarios? This kind of approach defeats the purpose of Cucumber as a living documentation and communication tool, and should be avoided. If your step definitions are ambiguous, add some more context (in business readable language) to make them less so.
Your IDE should help you step between Gherkin scenarios and the source code; you shouldn't need to have to add extra information in the scenarios for this.
You also don't need to use the auto generated step definitions - they are just there as a convenience and you can write your own.
We're using cucumberJS on a fairly large codebase with hundreds of cucumber scenarios and we've been running into issues with steps reuse.
Since all the steps in Cucumber are global, it's quite difficult to write steps like "and I select the first item in the list" or similar that would be similarly high-level. We end up having to append "on homepage" (so: "I select the first item in the list of folders on homepage") which just feels wrong and reads wrong.
Also, I find it very hard to figure out what the dependencies between steps are. For example we use a "and I see " pattern for storing a page object reference on the world cucumber instance to be used in some later steps. I find that very awkward since those dependencies are all but invisible when reading the .feature files.
What's your tips on how to use cucumber within a large team? (Including "ditch cucumber and use instead" :) )
Write scenarios/steps that are about what you are doing and why you are doing it rather than about how you do things. Cucumber is a tool for doing BDD. The key word here is Behaviour, and its interpretation. The fundamental idea behind Cucumber and steps is that each piece of behaviour (the what) has a unique name and place in the application, and in the application context you can talk about that behaviour using that name without ambiguity.
So your examples should never be in steps because they are about HOW your do something. Good steps never talk about clicking or selecting. Instead they talk about the reason Why you are clicking or selecting.
When you follow this pattern you end up with fewer steps at a higher level of abstraction that are each focused on a particular topic.
This pattern is easy to implement, and moderately easy to maintain. The difficulty is that to write the scenarios you have to have a profound understanding of what you are doing and why its important so you can discover/uncover the language you need to express yourself distinctly, clearly and simply.
I'll give my standard example about login. I use this because we share an understanding of What login is and Why its important. Realise before you can login that you have to be registered and that is complex.
Scenario: Login
Given I am registered
When I login
Then I should be logged in
The implementation of this is interesting in that I delegate all work to helper methods
Given I am registered
#i = create_registered_user
end
When I login
login_as(user: #i)
end
Then I should be logged in
should_be_logged_in
end
Now your problem becomes one of managing helper methods. What you have is a global namespace with a large number of helper methods. This is now a code and naming problem and All you have to do is
keep the number of helper methods as small as possible
keep each helper method simple
ensure there is no ambiguity between method names
ensure there is no duplication
This is still a hard problem, but
- its not as hard as what you are dealing with
- getting to this point has a large number of additional benefits
- its now a code problem, lots of people have experience of managing code.
You can do all these things with
- naming discipline (all my methods above have login in their name)
- clever but controlled use of arguments
- frequent refactoring and code cleaning
The code of your helper methods will have
- the highest churn of all your application code
- the greatest need to be simple and clear
So currently your problem is not about Cucumber its about debt you have with your existing scenarios and their implementation. You have to pay of your debt if you want things to improve, good luck
I have a feature file A.feature which generates a number in the response body. Now, I have to capture that text/number and then pass it as test data to another feature file.Do we need to write step definition or is there any other way?Please suggest.
Generally, you should not do that. In fact you should try to make your test cases totally independent from each other. It's a bad sign if a single code change breaks many of your tests (in your case, whenever the first feature breaks, the second one would as well.) It's also a bad sign that, as a starting point, your second feature needs a special response that is not easy to construct.
I have a requirement to add fields onto a form based on data from another set of entities. Is this possible using an event script or does it require a plugin?
Given that I understand your assignment correctly, it can be done using JavaScript as well as a plugin. There is a significant difference that you need to take into consideration.
Is the change to the other entities to be made only when an actual user loads a form? If so, JS is the right way.
Or perhaps you need to ensure that those values are written even if a console client or system process retrieves the value of the primary entity? In that case, C# is your only option.
EDIT:
Simply accessing the values from any entity in the onload event can be done using a call to oData. I believe someone else asked a similar question recently. The basic format will look like this.
http://Server:Port/Organization
/XrmServices/2011/OrganizationData.svc
/TheEntityLogicalNameOfYoursSet()?$filter=FieldName eq 'ValueOfIt'
Some extra remarks.
If you're targeting on-line installation, the syntax will differ, of course, because the Schema-Server-Port-Organization are provided in a different pattern (https, orgName.crm4.something.something.com etc.). You can look it up on Settings.
Perhaps it should go without saying and I'm sure you realize it but for completeness' sake, TheEntityLogicalNameOfYours needs to be substituted for the actual name (unless that is your actual name, in which case I'll be worried, haha).
If you're new to this whole oData thingy, keep asking. I got the impression that the info I'm giving you is appreciated but not really producing "aha!" experience for you. You might want to ask separate questions, though. Some examples right off the top of my head.
a. "How do I perform oData call in JavaScript?"
b. "How do I access the fetched data?"
c. "How do I add/remove/hide a field programmatically on a form?"
d. "How do I combine data from...?"