Boss wants me to have my test nice and organized into Actions in Keyword View.
But I have an extremely complex test, and I am not sure it is practical.
One website says,
It is applicable at its best for the following scenarios:
•small application or application with small independent functionalities that are not cross-tested;
•simple GUI that experiences no fluctuations from build to build;
•straight and simple business logic, with no or minimal number of pop-up dialogs;
•extremely simple test logic, implementing positive, “happy path” test cases, with no branching or looping;
•static dataset, or extremely small number of test data, hard-coded in QTP worksheets.
I notice every line says, 'simple', 'small', 'no branching', etc.
My test is entering data X number of times in an application window with 8 tabs, about 10-30 fields to fill out in each tab, with subwindows that pop up to fill out....in other words it is a real-world application and is not, 'simple'. There is plenty of looping and branching going on.
I have my code pretty much written in VB, but now I am trying to break it down into Actions and having problems (see my other post about how I can't make sub-Actions).
Should I even be trying to organize my code with Actions, or is that only for small trivial tests?
I like having the main flow in the actions. I call functions a lot.
Clients looked pleased when they can read the actions from top down to get the main flow.
I usually keep items for each tab on its own action.
I'm a fan of local Object Repositories since I figure that there will be an approximate match between local ORs and actions.
This is my preference and it has worked for me. Many others would not care do it this way.
It can be done now, but not quite easy to organize your scripts. I believe you are strong in your test flow. Based on the test flow the scripts can be converted into functions or actions. As suggested by others it's wise to go with function.
Organize -> Split -> Convert
Always look for Framework if you are getting involved in complex testing indeed.