Selenium Web Driver : How to map html elements to Java Object. - selenium

As part of Selenium Web-driver learning I came across a scenario. Please let me know the professional approach to proceed.
I am testing a eCommerce application where while I click on Mobile link all mobile phones are getting displayed.I want to check whether they are sorted based on name and price. So basically I need to get Name & price of all elements in the result page.
So My Question is there any way I can map html elements to java value objects ? Any API already available for doing this mapping for me ? Something similar to gson api for converting java objects to their corresponding Json representation ?
Deepu Nair

//Get all the mobile phones links into a list before sorting
List<WebElement> mobilelinks=driver.findElements(("locator"));
Map maps = new LinkedHashMap();//use linked hash map as it preserves the insertion order
for(int i=0;i<mobilelinks.size();i++){
//store the name and price as key value pair in map
maps.put("mobilelinks.get(i).getAttribute('name')","mobilelinks.get(i).getAttribute('price')" );
}
/*sort the map based on keys(names) store it in a separate list
sort the map based on values(prices) store it in a separate list
*/
/* Using webdriver click the sort by name and compare it with the list which we got after sorting
and also click sort by prices and compare it with the list*/
To catch an assertion and continue with the test after assertion failures override the Assertion class and create your own CustomAssertion or use SoftAssertions
CustomAssertion.java
public class CustomAssertions extends Assertion {
private Map<AssertionError, IAssert> m_errors = Maps.newLinkedHashMap();
#Override
public void executeAssert(IAssert a) {
try {
a.doAssert();
} catch(AssertionError ex) {
onAssertFailure(a, ex);
System.out.println(a.getActual());
System.out.println(ex.getMessage());
m_errors.put(ex, a);
}
}
public void assertAll() {
if (! m_errors.isEmpty()) {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder("The following asserts failed:\n");
boolean first = true;
for (Map.Entry<AssertionError, IAssert> ae : m_errors.entrySet()) {
if (first) {
first = false;
} else {
sb.append(", ");
}
sb.append(ae.getKey().getMessage());
}
throw new AssertionError(sb.toString());
}
}
}
Instead of using Assertions class to verify the tests use CustomAssertions class
Ex:
//create an object of CustomAssertions class
CustomAssertions custom_assert=new CustomAssertions();
cust_assert.assertTrue(2<1);
cust_assert.assertEquals("test", "testing");
//and finally after finishing the test in aftersuite method call
cust_assert.assertAll();
Hope this helps you if you have any doubts kindly get back...

Related

How to write an APEX #test for a picklist method?

I was searching for answears but I couldn't find it. It might be a beginner question, anyhow I am stuck.
What I am trying to write is a test in Apex. Basically the Apex code gets field names from one specific object. Each fieldname will be shown in a picklist, one after the other (that part is a LWC JS and HTML file).
So, only want to test the Apex for the moment.
I don't know how to check that a list contains 2 parameters, and those parameters are object and field. Then the values are correctly returned, and I don't know how to continue.
Here's the Apex class with the method, which I want to test.
public without sharing class LeadController {
public static List <String> getMultiPicklistValues(String objectType, String selectedField) {
List<String> plValues = new List<String>();
Schema.SObjectType convertToObj = Schema.getGlobalDescribe().get(objectType);
Schema.DescribeSObjectResult objDescribe = convertToObj.getDescribe();
Schema.DescribeFieldResult objFieldInfo = objDescribe.fields.getMap().get(selectedField).getDescribe();
List<Schema.PicklistEntry> picklistvalues = objFieldInfo.getPicklistValues();
for(Schema.PicklistEntry plv: picklistvalues) {
plValues.add(plv.getValue());
}
plValues.sort();
return plValues;
}
}
I welcome any answers.
Thank you!
This might be a decent start, just change the class name back to yours.
#isTest
public class Stack73155432Test {
#isTest
public static void testHappyFlow(){
List<String> picklistValues = Stack73155432.getMultiPicklistValues('Lead', 'LeadSource');
// these are just examples
System.assert(!picklistValues.isEmpty(), 'Should return something');
System.assert(picklistValues.size() > 5, 'At least 5 values? I dunno, whatever is right for your org');
System.assert(picklistValues[0] < picklistValues[1], 'Should be sorted alphabetically');
System.assert(picklistValues.contains('Web'), 'Or whatever values you have in the org');
}
#isTest
public static void testErrorFlow(){
// this is actually not too useful. You might want to catch this in your main code and throw AuraHandledExceptions?
try{
Stack73155432.getMultiPicklistValues('Account', 'AsdfNoSuchField');
System.assert(false, 'This should have thrown');
} catch(NullPointerException npe){
System.assert(npe.getMessage().startsWith('Attempt to de-reference a null object'), npe.getMessage());
}
}
}

How to create a simple HTML table in Vaadin Flow 14

I would like to create a simple HTML table in Vaadin flow, but the component is not present anymore (used to be available as com.vaadin.ui.Table). The table is meant to show the detailed properties (key-value pairs) of an item selected in a Grid.
What Vaadin Flow component can I use to implement this? And why was the table removed in Vaadin Flow in the first place?
Table was actually removed already in Vaadin8. https://vaadin.com/blog/-/blogs/mission-rip-table-migrate-to-grid-intro
For implementing a table in Flow there are a couple choices.
One is to use the Element API and one is to create Components for table.
For the element API version it could be something like:
Element table = new Element("table");
For(item : item rows to add) {
Element tr = new Element("tr");
table.appendChild(tr);
For(int i = 0; i < dataColumns; i++) {
Element td = new Element("td");
// could perhaps append a span with text context.
td.setText(item text for column i);
tr.appendChild(td);
}
}
For the Component approach the basic case would then perhaps be to implement the 3 elements as something like:
#Tag("table")
public class Table extends Component implements HasComponents {
public Row addRow() {
Row row = new Row();
add(row);
return row;
}
public Row getRow(int row) {
final Optional<Component> rowOptional = getElement().getChild(row)
.getComponent();
if(rowOptional.isPresent())
return (Row) rowOptional.get();
return null;
}
}
#Tag("tr")
public class Row extends Component {
public void add(Cell cell) {
getElement().appendChild(cell.getElement());
}
public int getRow() {
return getElement().getParent().indexOfChild(getElement());
}
}
#Tag("td")
public class Cell extends Component {
public int getCol() {
return getElement().getParent().indexOfChild(getElement());
}
public int getRow() {
return ((Row) getParent().get()).getRow();
}
public void setText(String text) {
getElement().setText(text);
}
}
There can be multiple use cases for Table component. There are couple of alternative's in Vaadin's Directory of community components.
Table showing list of data (similar to Grid, but more light weight approach)
https://vaadin.com/directory/component/beantable
Table as layout component, which supports row-span, col-span etc. and you populate each cell individually.
https://vaadin.com/directory/component/html-table
As these usecases are quite different , they are better catered by different Java API, although the HTML DOM structure they produce is very similar. Neither of these add-ons attempt to reproduce API of the Vaadin 7 Table component.
There is also a recipe in Cookbook, how to generate Table in TemplateRenderer of the Grid details row.
https://cookbook.vaadin.com/grid-details-table

Combining dataproviders TestNG

I have read a few stackoverflow posts about combining dataproviders but I cant't get anything to work.
What I'm currently doing is a selenium test that takes screenshots of every language the site is translated to.
It simply clicks through every link while taking screenshots of it, then it switches the URL to another language and repeat.
My problem is when doing this I can't redirect my screenshots to a specific folder per "language test". To do this I need a second dataprovider, but I already have a dataprovider for this test method for running a different URL per test.
So I need to combine these two dataproviders somehow.
They currently look like this
public static Object [][] language(){
return new Object[][]{
{"https://admin-t1.taxicaller.net/login/admin.php?lang=en"},
{"https://admin-t1.taxicaller.net/login/admin.php?lang=sv"},
};
}
public static Object [][] directory(){
return new Object[][]{
{"screenshotsEnglish.dir"},
{"screenshotsSwedish.dir"},
};
}
In my test class I just want to reach these two by writing
driver.get(**url**);
// This is the screenshot method. Where "Directory" is written I decide where to save the screenshots
Properties settings = PropertiesLoader.fromResource("settings.properties");
String screenshotDir = settings.getProperty(**directory**);
screenShooter = new ScreenShooter(driver, screenshotDir, "en");
Hope I have made myself clear, appreciate all help!
Regards
public static Object[][] dp() {
return new Object[][]{
{
"https://admin-t1.taxicaller.net/login/admin.php?lang=en",
"screenshotsEnglish.dir"
},
{
"https://admin-t1.taxicaller.net/login/admin.php?lang=sv",
"screenshotsSwedish.dir"
}
};
}
#Test(dataProvider = "dp")
public void t(String url, String directory) {
driver.get(url);
Properties settings = PropertiesLoader.fromResource("settings.properties");
String screenshotDir = settings.getProperty(directory);
screenShooter = new ScreenShooter(driver, screenshotDir, "en");
/*...*/
}

Best way to find the type of the object locator by passing the object locator alone in Selenium Webdriver

Is their any way to find the object locator type, by passing the object locator alone.
for e.g. i need to click on a login button, where its id=login, classname=loginbutton or xpath=//input[#name='login']. I need to build method where i will be just passing the objectlocator (either id or name) as the input and its type(either id or name) should be decided in the method like if it contains // then type should be of xpath etc.
I need to pass the objectLocator() which returns type to the findElement()
WebElement element = driver.findElement(objectLocator());
I do not think it is available off the shelf, you would have to implement your own logic.
The only thing is, let's say you want to search by linktext. As per your usecase, you would, in your object repo specify, "this is my linktext".
Now how do you know it is an id or a name or a linktext?
For xpath you can check if it starts with /, then its an xpath. If its only id or name then you can use ByIdorName, but i think it would become tricky with css and linktext.
The one thing I can think is you can establish some sort of conventions like if it is linktext precede your lcoator definition with linktext=blah blah and then you split and consume it.
I find it very useful to store all my locators as By objects and either use the By directly or pass the By into methods as I need them. For example:
By passwordField= By.id("login");
By userNameField = By.name("username");
By submitButton = By.xpath("\\myxpath\div[2]");
public void clickLogin() {
driver.findElement(submitButton).click();
}
I also use static Bys from other classes as well:
public void clickLogin() {
driver.findElement(LoginPage.SUBMIT_BUTTON).click();
}
The modern way to do this is using PageFactory and PageObjects
The following is a quick and dirty which will adapt selenium locators strings to WebDriver locators.
public enum LocatorType {
CLASSNAME, CSS, ID, LINK, NAME, TAGNAME, XPATH ;
}
public WebElement objectLocator(LocatorType type, String ref) {
switch(type) {
case ID:
return this.webDriver.findElement(By.id(ref));
case CLASSNAME:
return this.webDriver.findElement(By.className(ref));
case XPATH:
return this.webDriver.findElement(By.xpath(ref));
case CSS:
return this.webDriver.findElement(By.cssSelector(ref));
case LINK:
return this.webDriver.findElement(By.linkText(ref));
case NAME:
return this.webDriver.findElement(By.name(ref));
case TAGNAME:
return this.webDriver.findElement(By.tagName(ref));
}
return null;
}
public WebElement objectLocator(String identifier) {
String typeString = identifier.substring(0, identifier.indexOf('='));
String ref = identifier.substring(identifier.indexOf('=')+1, identifier.length());
if (typeString.toLowerCase().contains("classname")) {
return objectLocator(LocatorType.CLASSNAME, ref);
} else if (typeString.toLowerCase().contains("css")) {
return objectLocator(LocatorType.CSS, ref);
} else if (typeString.toLowerCase().contains("id")) {
return objectLocator(LocatorType.ID, ref);
} else if (typeString.toLowerCase().contains("link")) {
return objectLocator(LocatorType.LINK, ref);
} else if (typeString.toLowerCase().contains("name")) {
return objectLocator(LocatorType.NAME, ref);
} else if (typeString.toLowerCase().contains("tagname")) {
return objectLocator(LocatorType.TAGNAME, ref);
} else if (typeString.toLowerCase().contains("xpath")) {
return objectLocator(LocatorType.XPATH, ref);
} else {
return null;
}
}
It looks like you are looking for this solution because you have an object repository maintained somewhere outside of your code in some kind of properties file or xml.
Using gui maps has lot of disadvantages like,
- maintain an external file with a list of locators
- parse locator files to read keys (you can abstract this but still an overhead)
- when writing PageObjects you need to switch back and forth from Page to gui map
- possibility of multiple duplicate locators in gui maps
- object repo grows over time and becomes impossible to maintain
- debugging is far more difficult
What you are looking for is adding one more layer of complexity which is not required in my opinion. Automating browsers is a challenge in itself and writing maintainable test automation code is utmost important.
Use PageFactory in your page objects.
- Natural place for your locators are Page Objects themselves.
- Locators easily accessible in page objects for review or correction
- No need for explicit driver.findElement, with #FindBy you get that for free
- modern Java and awesome annotations make page objects look beautiful & readable
I have used gui maps before and struggled a lot. Switching to page factory made me realize that using object repository was such a bad idea!
This should do for locating element. I have given example till 3 level deep.
public WebElement findElement(String locator){
WebElement w = null;
try{
return (driver.findElement(By.id(locator)));
}catch(Exception e1){
try{
return ( driver.findElement(By.name(locator)));
}catch(Exception e2){
try{
return (driver.findElement(By.xpath(locator)));
}catch(Exception e3){
System.out.println("Cound not find a locator");
e3.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
return(w);
}
public void type(String locator, String value){
try{
WebElement w= findElement(locator);
w.sendKeys(""+value);
Thread.sleep(sleepTime);
}catch(Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
-Vinay

Use MEF to compose parts but postpone the creation of the parts

As explained in these questions I'm trying to build an application that consists of a host and multiple task processing clients. With some help I have figured out how to discover and serialize part definitions so that I could store those definitions without having to have the actual runtime type loaded.
The next step I want to achieve (or next two steps really) is that I want to split the composition of parts from the actual creation and connection of the objects (represented by those parts). So if I have a set of parts then I would like to be able to do the following thing (in pseudo-code):
public sealed class Host
{
public CreationScript Compose()
{
CreationScript result;
var container = new DelayLoadCompositionContainer(
s => result = s);
container.Compose();
return script;
}
public static void Main()
{
var script = Compose();
// Send the script to the client application
SendToClient(script);
}
}
// Lives inside other application
public sealed class Client
{
public void Load(CreationScript script)
{
var container = new ScriptLoader(script);
container.Load();
}
public static void Main(string scriptText)
{
var script = new CreationScript(scriptText);
Load(script);
}
}
So that way I can compose the parts in the host application, but actually load the code and execute it in the client application. The goal is to put all the smarts of deciding what to load in one location (the host) while the actual work can be done anywhere (by the clients).
Essentially what I'm looking for is some way of getting the ComposablePart graph that MEF implicitly creates.
Now my question is if there are any bits in MEF that would allow me to implement this kind of behaviour? I suspect that the provider model may help me with this but that is a rather large and complex part of MEF so any guidelines would be helpful.
From lots of investigation it seems that is not possible to separate the composition process from the instantiation process in MEF so I have had to create my own approach for this problem. The solution assumes that the scanning of plugins results in having the type, import and export data stored somehow.
In order to compose parts you need to keep track of each part instance and how it is connected to other part instances. The simplest way to do this is to make use of a graph data structure that keeps track of which import is connected to which export.
public sealed class CompositionCollection
{
private readonly Dictionary<PartId, PartDefinition> m_Parts;
private readonly Graph<PartId, PartEdge> m_PartConnections;
public PartId Add(PartDefinition definition)
{
var id = new PartId();
m_Parts.Add(id, definition);
m_PartConnections.AddVertex(id);
return id;
}
public void Connect(
PartId importingPart,
MyImportDefinition import,
PartId exportingPart,
MyExportDefinition export)
{
// Assume that edges point from the export to the import
m_PartConnections.AddEdge(
new PartEdge(
exportingPart,
export,
importingPart,
import));
}
}
Note that before connecting two parts it is necessary to check if the import can be connected to the export. In other cases MEF does that but in this case we'll need to do that ourselves. An example of how to approach that is:
public bool Accepts(
MyImportDefinition importDefinition,
MyExportDefinition exportDefinition)
{
if (!string.Equals(
importDefinition.ContractName,
exportDefinition.ContractName,
StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase))
{
return false;
}
// Determine what the actual type is we're importing. MEF provides us with
// that information through the RequiredTypeIdentity property. We'll
// get the type identity first (e.g. System.String)
var importRequiredType = importDefinition.RequiredTypeIdentity;
// Once we have the type identity we need to get the type information
// (still in serialized format of course)
var importRequiredTypeDef =
m_Repository.TypeByIdentity(importRequiredType);
// Now find the type we're exporting
var exportType = ExportedType(exportDefinition);
if (AvailableTypeMatchesRequiredType(importRequiredType, exportType))
{
return true;
}
// The import and export can't directly be mapped so maybe the import is a
// special case. Try those
Func<TypeIdentity, TypeDefinition> toDefinition =
t => m_Repository.TypeByIdentity(t);
if (ImportIsCollection(importRequiredTypeDef, toDefinition)
&& ExportMatchesCollectionImport(
importRequiredType,
exportType,
toDefinition))
{
return true;
}
if (ImportIsLazy(importRequiredTypeDef, toDefinition)
&& ExportMatchesLazyImport(importRequiredType, exportType))
{
return true;
}
if (ImportIsFunc(importRequiredTypeDef, toDefinition)
&& ExportMatchesFuncImport(
importRequiredType,
exportType,
exportDefinition))
{
return true;
}
if (ImportIsAction(importRequiredTypeDef, toDefinition)
&& ExportMatchesActionImport(importRequiredType, exportDefinition))
{
return true;
}
return false;
}
Note that the special cases (like IEnumerable<T>, Lazy<T> etc.) require determining if the importing type is based on a generic type which can be a bit tricky.
Once all the composition information is stored it is possible to do the instantiation of the parts at any point in time because all the required information is available. Instantiation requires a generous helping of reflection combined with the use of the trusty Activator class and will be left as an exercise to the reader.