I have an SWT project, where are several custom GUI elements, and i try to find a way, to build some kind of proxy on top of them, like the default ones built on top of Labels, Texts, etc. Is there a way to do this? It would be really convenient, to create a custom GuiTestObject subclass, and use it (make RFT use it?) to identify these custom GUI elements, like KTable for example, because now these controls are handled by the best class known by RFT, like Composite or ScrolledComposite, so it's impossible to expose the custom properties of these classes for testing, and the best way to test these elements is by image comparison.
If this is not possible, then is there a way, to somehow get a reference to the actual ui component from a GuiTestObject? I tried in debug mode, but it looks like, that the reference is intentionally hidden somehow. Is there a way, to bypass this, and somehow access the reference? (I couldn't see the actual ui element neither using the debugger, nor using reflection).
Any help is greatly appreciated!
The TestObject that you have available in the script should represent the actual object in the AUT.
As you said the methods exposed to the script would be limited to what is provided by the TestObject however RFT has API called "invoke" that you can use to invoke some method directly on the control.
You should find more info on invoke here: Using Invoke in RFT
Second , you should be able to extend an Existing proxy using the Proxy SDK of RFT where you can add custom behavior for the proxies
You can get more info aobut proxy SDK here:
Proxy SDK in RFT
Related
This question is likely a particular XAML application. XAML is a custom markup to instantiate objects and, as such, define custom applications. Note that, it serves to both declare WPF user interfaces and WWF workflows. It would also help to specify, e.g., a custom source-code change detection solution. To avoid getting in deeper in unnecessary details. I need to design a custom XAML-based model that, like the one for WPF and the one for WWF do, allows me to declare a custom application on top of XAML, without having to create a WPF or WWF project. Is this sort of third-part XAML-like provider possible to build?
<Approach>
<PrimitiveExample
OriginalType={Type syntax:LiteralSyntax}
ModifiedType={Type syntax:LiteralSyntax}
Propagation.Matched={Binding MatchedPropagationCommand}>
...
</PrimitiveExample>
...
<Approach/>
Let us see it this way. Is there a way to get a stand-alone XAML file that works as follows?
a) There will be a project item, e.g., named "Stand-alone XAML".
b) I create a new "Stand-alone XAML" item named, e.g., "Solution.sccd", and I add it to a console application, class library, or many other projects. This because it will be a sort of smart .config.
c) I can set up a root instance in "Solution.sccd" (likely containing a lot of nested instances) - this is natural for XAML.
d) When declaring instances in "Solution.sccd", I can use features like attached properties, binding, and many other smart features or markup extensions that can be used with WPF or WWF, but this will not be a WPF or WWF project.
e) I can instantiate the declared root instance, e.g., with simple code line like "var rootObject = XAMLInstanceCreator.Create(Solution.sccd)", and use that object.
Does this make sense now?
Regards, Guillermo.
I would like to write a JUnit5 Extension where I have to take some action when a test method annotated with #Disabled is found. Unfortunately, beforeTestExecution() is not called for such methods. Does anybody have an idea how to intercept such #Disabled test methods ?
Thanks !
As described in the User Guide, you can disable the built-in ExecutionCondition that handles #Disabled by default by setting junit.jupiter.conditions.deactivate to org.junit.*DisabledCondition (see Configuration Parameters on how to set it). This will cause your tests to be executed.
Next, you need to implement your own ExecutionCondition extension, check for #Disabled, take your action and return ConditionEvaluationResult.disabled("...").
In order to avoid having to register your extension on each test class, you can activate Automatic Extension Registration and register your extension globally.
Depending on what you want to achieve, it may be easier to register your own TestExecutionListener (see Plugging in Your Own Test Execution Listeners) and implement executionSkipped().
The extension point used here is https://github.com/junit-team/junit5/blob/master/junit-jupiter-api/src/main/java/org/junit/jupiter/api/extension/ExecutionCondition.java
It might be interesting to find out how several implementors compose, i.e. if the 2nd one will be called at all and under what circumstances. You’ll probably have to dive into Jupiter code or do some experiments.
In building my current (first) Windows Phone app it requires me to create a Windows Runtime Component to achieve the functionality I require. In order for this setup to work and not duplicate a lot of code from my PCLs into the task class itself, I wanted to use the MMVMCross IOC that I am already using throughout the application.
Unfortunately, the Background Task (IBackgroundTask) is executed in an entirely different process. Trying to utilize the IOC via Mvx.Resolve throws a NullReferenceException. I cannot figure out how to initialize the IOC as the standard "setup.cs" method does not work in the Runtime Component.
I do not need the entire MVVMCross stack for this -- just the IOC.
Thank you.
I finally figured it out. I have to re-register on the background task, but to initialize you would call the basic initialize method on the simple IOC container:
Cirrious.CrossCore.IoC.MvxSimpleIoCContainer.Initialize();
Plugins were a problem, as the standard plugin mechanism is not available, but you can manually register the interfaces such as this:
Mvx.LazyConstructAndRegisterSingleton<IMvxFileStore>(() => new MvxWindowsCommonBlockingFileStore());
Of course, you can still register your other types and interfaces as you normally would.
I am using Ninject in substitution of MEF and I was wondering if it's possible to get lazy instances via standard kernel methods and not via [inject] .
I need this since when building up my application's menu I have to pass all particular view models and then if the user is enabled on that function to add it to the menu
Thanks
Sure thing, you can inject a Lazy<T> and the value will only be instanciated when you access Lazy<T>.Value.
You can also inject a Func<T> and use it to create T whenever you like (with the func, every call creates a new instance).
Of course you can also do IResolutionRoot.Get<Lazy<T>>() or IResolutionRoot.Get<Func<T>>(), but usually that's a sign of bad design (service locator), so use constructor injection when it's feasible.
EDIT: When is the "enabling of the user" happening? Is it a one time thing? What is being displayed before and after?
There might be other/better designs to achieve this but it's hard to say with that little information.
I am attempting to write a MarkupExtension to support the process of instantiating custom types via XAML. My custom types are POCOs and not descendants of DependencyObject. There seems to be no straightforward XAML mechanism for MarkupExtensions to obtain references to objects in the graph that is being loaded. I note that the WPF machinery provides some of these capabilities but the relevant properties are all internal.
Any ideas?
I wrote a class that I use to bind to ViewModel commands, and it contains some code to retrieve the root of the XAML. It uses reflection on private WPF members, so it's not exactly clean, but it works... You can find it here
http://www.thomaslevesque.com/2009/03/17/wpf-using-inputbindings-with-the-mvvm-pattern/
BTW, it doesn't work with WPF 4 because the private implementation has changed... If you're interested I can post an updated version that takes these changes into account