I am curious how many of you do not use Visual 4Test in silktest but use classic format?
I spoke to Segue about compile errors when you do not use Visual 4Test a feature they provide and they said since only a tiny percentage of people do not use visual 4Test they often do not spend much development and QA time on it. So I was curious how many do not use Visual 4Test, in the last 2 companies I worked for over 150 seats combines of Silk no one used Visual 4Test.
I hope this doesn't sound rude but I would be surprised if anyone can give a good reason to use classic mode over Visual mode. As far as I can tell there isn't anything that can be done in classic mode that can't be done in Visual mode. Unless you count adding your own brackets as a feature [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
When you have a file open in SilkTest check the Edit menu. The last item is "Visual 4Test". If this is checked you are in Visual mode. Visual 4Test mode gives you features like keyword highlighting, auto-complete and collapsible blocks of code. It is the default mode so you are probably using it without knowing.
[ QUOTE ]
Okay so I may be the minority who is not using Visual 4Test.
Let me ask you this, I have 5000+ files saved in classic format what problems will I face converting them to Visual 4Test?
Is there a tool to do the conversion? For example the "/* .. */" comment block does not work in Visual 4Test. Are there any other simular type problems when converting?
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you'll get better solution(s) to your conversion problem from the SilkTest Support group since the majority of us took advantage of using the Visual 4Test Editor since QA Partner version 1.0 and never had to worry about any conversion problem. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
You can always start with Global Search and Replace though.