| || |
Data VS. Script maintenance
This question is a further analysis of an earlier post I had in this group: I have discussed whether or not to use separate compiled modules for each screen for the AUT. Allowing for this type of scripting would give me a more simplistic approach to script maintenance. Dictating which functionality to run on a given screen would be determined by a data-driven "control value" which would dictate what functions to run for a given screen.
To take this even further, it may be practical to have an excel file which would have the Rows as the data, Columns as the screen objects and worksheets as the individual screens. This setup would allow for updating of the data, rather than maintaining the script. Generic TSL code would read the excel data and perform the edit_set( "object", "text") task.
This method seems somewhat unorthodox, however it is an interesting approach to the automation process. If anyone has thoughts on the pros/cons of either approach to test automation I would greatly appreciate it.
Re: Data VS. Script maintenance
Your concept sounds like it will work.
Keep in mind you should have the .XLS files with only ONE "spread sheet" in them. I know this might mean several .XLS files per test script directory but this will keep all the info needed for that Test Script in the Test Script directory. Also try not to use too many Columns. It might be easier to have Three .XLS files than to have One with Three times as many Columns. Also you might want to have several .XLS files if the number of rows gets too large. Same thing for GUI map files. Better to have several small ones than One huge One.
This way you can move the files to another directory (after creating the Test in WinRunner) and all should work correctly.
You should break your Compiled Modules into the parts you need for each Test Script.
This will decrease the amount of memory needed to load the Compiled Module and keep just the stuff you need for the Test Script in One Directory.
I know the urge to create One Large Compiled Module seems like it would be best (All stuff in One Spot), but your concept sounds like you want to have just what you need in the Test Script directory for that Test.
cranem451 - email@example.com
[This message has been edited by cranem451 (edited 12-04-2002).]