On 16.04.12 23:52:00, Andras Mantia wrote: > On Monday, April 16, 2012 08:59:13 AM Volker Krause wrote: > > I don't think UI is necessarily easier to change than internal API, > > the key difference is that you'll get a compile error for the unit > > test, while you wont notice a broken Squish test immediately. > > I was thinking about such innocent things like changing the title of a > message box/dialog. If the object is found by exact match for the title, > then chaning it will likely break the testcase whenever the dialog or > any child widget of the dialog is accessed. Eg. changing "Error" to > "Error doing X" can break your test. > I agree, it is also easy to break a unit test, but the problem is the > above, as for a regular C++ developer user visible string change is > safe, while from Squish test point of view might be not. > The same is true if you reorganize the UI e.g in Designer and the > objetc hierarchy is changed. With a not carefully set up test this will > cause major problems. With a not carefully set up test suite and a > dialog from a library it will cause a lot of problems in many of the > tests and that will be time consuming to fix.
Well, but you can have similar problems with badly designed unit-tests (and thats what you describe above, a badly designed UI test). If the API/Class it tests changes behaviour slightly you may end up fixing up a lot of places too if you didn't take care of avoiding code/data duplication in the beginning. Andreas
