We are sharing a build script for FAKE across a set of projects. We want to keep this one build script the same but make it possible to extend with other targets. One way I could think of doing this is by loading .fsx files if they fit a specific naming pattern like al files that matches build-*.fsx however I can't seem to think of a way to load these files dynamically. Any suggestions on how to do this or how to accomplish the desired result are all good as answers
if I could I would have done something like
#load "build-*.fsx"
It's not completely clear to me why you want to do this but maybe this will help. Refer to a single script in each project:
#load "load-build-scripts.fsx"
And then in single load-build-scripts.fsx:
#load "build-1.fsx"
#load "build-2.fsx"
#load "build-3.fsx"
...
This second file you will need to change whenever you add a new script.
It's not generally recommended to do this. Because now if these separate scripts refer to each other then some scripts will be loaded more than once. Scripts aren't really meant to be used for cases this complex.
Another option is to use FAKE as a console project instead of using scripts and the fake-cli tool. Then you can use normal .NET project dependencies.
I am using IntelliJ to develop Java applications which uses YAML files for the app properties. These YAML files have some placeholder/template params like:
credentials:
clientId: ${client.id}
secretKey: ${secret.key}
My CI/CD pipeline takes care of substituting the actual value for these params (client.id and secret.key) based on the environment on which it is getting deployed.
I'm looking for something similar in IntelliJ. Something like, I configure some static/fixed values for the params (Ex: client.id and secret.key) within the IDE and when I run locally using the IDE, these values should be substituted onto these YAML files and run.
This will actually save me from updating the YAML files with the placeholder params each time I check in some other changes to my version control system.
There is no such feature in IDEA, because IDEA cannot auto detect every possible known or unknown expression language or template macros that you could use in a yaml file. Furthermore, IDEA must create a context for that or these template files.
For IDEA it's just a normal yaml file.
IDEA has a language injection feature.
That can be used to inject sql into a java string for instance or inject any language into a yaml field.
This is a really nice feature and can help you to rename sql column names aso. but this won't solve your special problem, because you want to make that template "runnable" within in certain context where you define your variables.
My suggestion would be, to write a small simple program that makes nearly the same as the template engine does.
When you only need simple string replacements and no macro execution then this could be done via regular expression.
If it's more complicated I would use the same template engine as the "real processor" does.
If you want further help, it would be good to know how your yaml processing pipeline looks like.
Cucumber Gherkin: Is there a way to have your gherkin scenarios written and managed in excel sheets instead of .feature files in IntelliJ or Eclipse like in SpecFlow+Excel(screenshot given as link below)? I am using Cucumber-JVM with selenium for my automation framework.
Excel based Scenarios
PS: Will there be any pros or cons to using excel sheets as your feature files?
No, Gherkin is the language understood by Cucumber.
If you want to introduce Excel in the equation, you probably want to use some other tool. Or implement your own functionality that reads Excel and does something interesting based on the content.
You could write a compiler that takes .csv files and translates them into feature files by doing a write.
Here's a quick thing I whipped up in JS that does just that.
First it removes blank lines, then searches through for keywords with a missing colon (it might happen somewhere down the road) and adds those in, checks for an examples table, and as per your photo, this was easy to do, as it was just checking whether the start character was a comma (after having removed the blank lines, and keywords always being in the first section). Finally, removing the rest of the commas.
The only difference, I believe, is that mine included the Feature: and Scenario:/Scenario Outline line that is needed to create a valid scenario in cucumber.
So yes. It is possible. You'll just have to compile the csv's into feature files first.
function constructFeature(csvData) {
let data = csvData,
blankLineRegex = /^,+$/gm,
keywordsWithCommasRegex = /(Feature|Scenario|Scenario Outline|Ability|Business Need|Examples|Background),/gm,
examplesTableRegex = /^,.*$/gm;
data = data
.toString()
.replace(blankLineRegex, "");
data.match(keywordsWithCommasRegex).forEach((match) => {
data = data.replace(match, match.replace(',', ":,"))
});
data.match(examplesTableRegex).forEach((match) => {
data = data.replace(match, match.replace(/,/g, "|").replace(/$/, "|"))
});
data = data.replace(/,/g, " ");
data = data.replace(/\ +/g, " ");
console.log(data);
}
let featureToBuild = `Feature,I should be able to eat apples,,
,,,
Scenario Outline,I eat my apples,,
Given,I have ,<start>,apples
When,I eat,<eat>,apples
Then,I should have,<end>,apples
,,,
Examples,,,
,start,eat,end
,4,2,2
,3,2,1
,4,3,1`
constructFeature(featureToBuild);
Just take that output and shove it into an aptly named feature file.
And here's the original excel document:
The downside of using Excel is that you'll be using Excel.
The upside of using feature files as part of your project are:
* they are under version control (assuming you use git or similar)
* you IDE with Cucumber plugin can help you:
- For instance, IntelliJ (which has a free Community edition) will highlight any steps that have not been implemented yet, or suggest steps that have been implemented
- You can also generate step definitions from your feature file
* when running tests you will see if and where your feature file violates Gherkin syntax
TL;DR: Having the feature file with your code base will make it easier to write and implement scenarios!
Also, like #Thomas Sundberg said, Cucumber cannot read Excel.
Cucumber can only process the feature files, so you will have to copy your scenarios from Excel to feature files at some point.
So what you are asking is not possible with Cucumber.
If you want to read test cases from Excel you'll have to build your own data driven tests. You could for instance use Apache POI.
There's a solution out there which does scenarios and data only in Excel. However, this I have tried in conjunction with Cucumber and not with any test application. You could try and see if you want to use this:
Acceptance Tests Excel Addin (for Gherkin)
However, not that Excel as a workbook or multiple workbooks can be source controlled, but it is hard to maintain revisions.
But then Excel provides you flexibility with managing data. You must also think not duplicating your test information and data in multiple places. So check this out, may be helpful.
I am making Automation Framework using Selenium , JAVA, Maven, TestNG & Eclipse.
So my question is regarding which TYPE OF FILE I should use for:
Keeping test Data ? (Right now I am using XML file as it is light &
free unlike Excel)
Creating test case. ? (Currently I am using simple .Java text file for each test case)
For creating Reports ? (Thinking to make XML report & then display it using HTML file)
Will be nice if you share Pros & Cons along with your views/recommendation/suggestion.
I think this will help me finalize my file structure. We can add functionality & facilities anytime.
Thanks a lot.
Keeping test Data, you might want to try using .Java files to store data, then use getter and setter. If you are using TestNG you can use the annotation #DataProvider() which will really help you on keeping test data.
Constants can also be put in . Java files as an interface
Creating test case --> It is a good thing to use .Java file
Creating reports --> Yep, you got the idea. Try to use TestNG, it's easy to set up.
Every tutorial I have seen for mocha-phantomjs shows having a test harness html file, and a separate javascript file that gets included.
Is this the correct way to do this for each test? I want to create a separate test for each page in my website, but it seems like overkill/crazy to duplicate an html file for every test case.
Granged, this is my first time trying to use mocha-phantomjs, but still, it seems really odd to create an html file and a js for every test case.
What is the standard for doing this sort of thing? I have been googling for about an hour now and can't find any good examples.
I know it seems weird, but... yes.
You need fixture (or harness) files in the "/test" directory. By default, Mocha looks in this directory for filenames with a .html extension, starting with test.html.
Make sure to include the script (and css) tags for 1) mocha, 2) chai (or whatever other assertion library you want), 3) and your specific test suites.
Personally, I've found it helps to use it with a modular bootloader like RequireJS. That way all your fixture files can point to a single configuration file: less maintenance.