5 ms·

The thing is, "programming" tests might be the most robust solution if you know how to do it - but it also can be a waste of developer time. In the end, you spe

The thing is, "programming" tests might be the most robust solution if you know how to do it - but it also can be a waste of developer time. In the end, you spend your time on debugging the tests itself... In my experience, record and playback can work well. Especially visual, screenshot-based solutions like Sikuli or Kantu are actually more stable then most developers think. And the beauty of them is that they can also be used by non-developers, i. e. "manual testers", so the developers can actually work on the main product, not the test suite.

dokko1230 9y ago
those are some good resources. I didn't even know they existed.
holtalanm 9y ago
Sikuli is great. Especially for automating non-web applications. I specifically remember a project I had where we automated an entire test suite using Sikuli on an SAP frontend. Kinda led me to create https://sourceforge.net/projects/sikuli4net/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/sikuli4net/ Sikuli4net is pretty much a dead project now due to me having absolutely no time to devote to it though. :(
HashHishBang 9y ago
That kind of attitude is why my entire career path exists. QA Automation is something that I'm constantly surprised people don't know exists. Product devs resent writing tests so we are the ones who do that exclusively. As a counter to your experience I've spent a great amount of time stamping out issues with record-and-playback tests. They're a passable stop-gap if you desperately need testing and, for whatever reason, haven't written any. Sikuli is possibly worse, though it's been a few years since we last evaluated it and quickly decided against using it in any serious capacity. Using manual testers as discount automation testers is a waste of everyone's time. They're the true experts in actual use of the product. I've seen them find more issues that from a code perspective shouldn't really be possible that it's given me an implicit trust and respect of their abilities. If someone wants automated testing it's another thing they're going to have to spend money on. Doing it half-assed is more than likely going to do more harm than good.

dokko1230 9y ago

those are some good resources. I didn't even know they existed.

holtalanm 9y ago

Sikuli is great. Especially for automating non-web applications. I specifically remember a project I had where we automated an entire test suite using Sikuli on an SAP frontend. Kinda led me to create https://sourceforge.net/projects/sikuli4net/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/sikuli4net/ Sikuli4net is pretty much a dead project now due to me having absolutely no time to devote to it though. :(

HashHishBang 9y ago

That kind of attitude is why my entire career path exists. QA Automation is something that I'm constantly surprised people don't know exists. Product devs resent writing tests so we are the ones who do that exclusively. As a counter to your experience I've spent a great amount of time stamping out issues with record-and-playback tests. They're a passable stop-gap if you desperately need testing and, for whatever reason, haven't written any. Sikuli is possibly worse, though it's been a few years since we last evaluated it and quickly decided against using it in any serious capacity. Using manual testers as discount automation testers is a waste of everyone's time. They're the true experts in actual use of the product. I've seen them find more issues that from a code perspective shouldn't really be possible that it's given me an implicit trust and respect of their abilities. If someone wants automated testing it's another thing they're going to have to spend money on. Doing it half-assed is more than likely going to do more harm than good.