Microsoft Coded UI Test (CUIT). Can I create an independent (external) Visual Studio 2012 Premium or Ultimate solution in C# to record on my application UI without the application's source code? This solution can reference the application's assemblies. The CUIT API does not seem to help. It is not desirable to use Microsoft guidelines in doing CUIT, as it creates and inserts a test project into the application's solution. The development team does not want this test project, created by the QA team, to be part of their source code to check into their source control.
Coded UI testing with Visual Studio is about testing the user interface of an application. Coded UI does not care how the application was constructed (but see Note below). Coded UI test projects do not need to be in the same solution as the application. Coded UI can be used to test websites and web applications (via a web browser) where there is no Visual Studio solution available for the application. Coded UI can also be used as an automation tool, to automate routine operations that use several programs and websites to perform some action. For such automation there would be no single solution file that should have the Coded UI project.
My understanding of Microsoft's Coded UI guidelines is that sometimes it is good to have application and test in the same solution, just to keep them together so as to encourage testers and developers to use the test and keep them up to date. But there is nothing to force such togetherness.
I do not understand the impact of this sentence in the original question: "This solution can reference the application's assemblies."
Note: Coded UI needs the application under test to expose some of its user interface properties via the MSAA or UIA mechanisms. This is done for you with many types of software. See the "Platform Support" section of the "Content Index for Coded UI Test" at http://blogs.msdn.com/b/mathew_aniyan/archive/2010/02/11/content-index-for-coded-ui-test.aspx .
Added 2013-05-02:
The clarification, within the comment, about wanting to link a Coded UI test to the DLLs of an application suggests there may be some confusion between what Coded UI tests are for and what unit tests are for.
Coded UI accesses the user interface of an application much like a screen reader for the visually impaired would. It also moves the mouse pointer, clicks buttons or links and enters text much like the software for people who cannot use a normal keyboard or mouse. Coded UI does not access the code directly so it does not need to reference any DLLs of the application. Before testing your application, I suggest you experiment with writing Coded UI tests to drive the Windows Calculator or to fill in forms on web pages. There are many videos and tutorials on the internet that demonstrate how to use Coded UI. Once you have some understanding of what Coded UI does and how to use it, you should be in a much better position to test your application.
Related
I need to load and performance test 500 virtual users load with 5 different locations so can I do it with microsoft coded ui.
Load and performance testing from a different location is important in my case. can someone suggest if it possible with coded ui or some other tools they can do it.
The short answer is no(you can but it won't make any sense to use 500 different machines as coded UI uses active desktop). Coded UI tool is used for UI test automation. Also, coded UI is deprecated.
But you can do performance testing using visual studio. refer below link for more details on the same.
Performance testing using visual studiio
I am new to Xamarin and not sure if chose Xamarin.Forms to create a application for ios and android platform has a problem or not.
The application has some features below:
The application will be able to running some code in background without launching application by user.
The application can be launched by a href link or a notification.
The application is able to launch a builtin Camera application, and receive picture data from Camera application.
Thanks,
Bo
The features you are mentioning can be done with both. Actually, anything you can do on Xamarin.iOS and Xamarin.Android can be done with Forms. Because Forms is only an abstraction layer for the UI which is installed by a NuGet package.
Now, having that said when to use Forms or when to use iOS/Android? It is mostly about UI. Are you going to do some advanced or platform specific stuff is is easier to implement that with the platform specific project.
If you UI will be the same in both platforms and mostly consists of some lists and input fields, then that is a very good candidate for a Forms project.
Notice how I said it is easier to do in the platform specific projects. Again here, you can do anything in Forms as well by the means of Custom Renderers, it is just a bit harder to do.
Ideally try it out yourself and see what suits you best.
In regard with your need to execute code in the background. This will be tricky and is very dependent on the platform that you're on. You will definitely have to write platform specific code for that for which you can use the DependencyService to abstract it to your shared code.
However like AlancLui mentioned executing code in the background isn't something that is easy to do on mobile. On iOS it is restricted to accessing location data or playing music, but still your app needs to be running (in the background). Android has something called Services for this, which makes it a bit easier.
Is there are web framework that allows creating of custom Web UI designers that can be embedded into a webpage/webapp?
What I am looking for is to create a web UI that allows users to edit the UI in a drag and drop style editor. It should be possible to select some widgets (like these: http://scaffy.railsware.com/futurico/#pagination) and to select a data source (will be provided by back-end, nodejs).
Background: I am not a web designer and have no previous web experience. I just want to know if it possible to create what I am looking for and how much effort it would be. My background is in embedded Linux development and I would like to create an easy way for people to create machines with single board computers. The embedded stuff is pretty much complete and I am exploring ways to create nice and user editable user interfaces.
I think what you want is possible.
However... as far I know nothing exists which will do exactly what you require.
There are thousands of UI widgets on the Web to choose from but you would need a custom built backend cms developed especially for your needs
There plenty of Web agencies who could provide a bespoke solution. They could also assist with updates and adding new widgets.
So it can be done (and may encounter some browser incompatability issues), but you'll just have to be prepared to spend money.
VS2013 update 5, MVC5 using Areas
I have a stand-alone function programmed for a website. The functionality is a specific user interface to collect survey responses in a particular way. It has several controllers, a model and a group of views. The functionality is completely contained in an Area of the project, except for the Shared _Layout file that provides the main menu for consistency.
'Is it possible for me to' / 'how do I' compile this Area into a single or set of .dll file(s) that I could then add conveniently to other websites? I'm assuming creating something for transfer/download is very standard functionality. For example, I used Elmah.MVC for this site. What I want to do is pretty much create a package that can be downloaded in a similar way to how we integrate Elmah.MVC into a site. (Be certain I'm not talking about creating error logging software, I'm only using Elmah.MVC as an example of software that is easily integrated into other website applications.)
I've never compiled any website functionality into a .dll(s) for use elsewhere and would appreciate either some specific guidance, or perhaps what would be easier is to provide a link with a good step by step tutorial or explanation for how to do this. Most of what I've found on the web describes bits and pieces of doing this, but it's not enough for me to feel confident with it.
It seems to me there are a lot of 'moving parts' to taking a particular piece of an MVC application and turning it into something that is easily added to other projects.
A particular issue I don't quite grasp is the difference in downloaded packages between getting code and getting just the .dll(s). For instance, when I download an MVC5 site, I get controllers, models and views, but when I download Elmah I get a .dll and no code files. Also, I do understand the concept of transforms, but I'm just struggling right now with even getting from my programmed application into a 'package' regardless of the transforms that make it easy to integrate into another website.
These are just some of my questions I have about how to perform this particular process in developing deliverable and/or shareable software.
What you are looking to do is create a portable MVC Area project. A Portable Area is a set of reusable multi page functionality can be dropped into an application to provide rich functionality without having to custom build functionality that is literally the same in every application. An MVC Portable Area is really just a dll that contains the views, controllers, scripts, etc… needed to use in a website that is either a Web Forms website or an MVC website. A developer can use them for a reusable widget or a complete engine. I have actually used them for both. Here is a link with some basic info to get started. http://elegantcode.com/2012/04/06/mvc-portable-areas/
We are looking into coded UI, and since we have C# coding experience we'll be coding up the automated tests ourselves.
I already know that it is possible to have a test case with defined test steps. Each test step is actually a function inside the test method and the description comes from the summary.
This is a great way for the c# coders to expose what they're doing to the non coding testers who will interact with these automated tests using MTM (Microsoft test manager).
However, it would be awesome if the C# coders were able to create generic functions as "Shared Steps" perhaps, and in this way non technical testers were able to assemble new tests in MTM using these building blocks.
Functions such as : Open the settings dialog, Maximize Window, Add an item (with parameters), Close all open tabs, etc.
However these would be coded functions, not from a recording.
The idea would be that once these functions are created and stored in TFS (Again as shared steps), the tester would then be able to use these functions as building blocks for more automated tests.
I also have to stress that these functions will be fully automated, and so new tests assembled in MTM too need to be fully automated without needing to open up Visual Studio.
Is this at all possible?
An approach used by some people is to create a test framework containing many useful functions. The test itself is then written as a data driven Coded UI test, each step being one entry from the data source. (Typically each step might be one line in CSV file.) Some columns of the data source would be commands and others data for those commands.
The commands could be relatively low level such as: find a window, navigate to a page, run an application, find a control in a window, enter text into a field, click a button or a link, verify that a field contains a given string.
Commands could be for higher level activities in your applications, such as: login, fill in a form.
Frameworks can let non coders write tests using terminology they understand. Frameworks are challenging to write.
This isn't really possible in the way you're asking - you will not be able to have your non-technical testers creating automated tests from test manager. A coded UI test will always have to exist as a test in a code file.
All of the details for a test manager test are available through the TFS API, so I suppose it should be possible to create your own layer that could generate coded UI code based on a shared step mapping system, but it would be a fairly major undertaking - its probably easier to have automated tests created by technical people.