Le jeudi 12 novembre 2009 à 17:35 +0100, Marcos Caceres a écrit : > On the other hand, automated test generation can generate a large number > of test cases and is less prone to human errors. But, at the same time, > it cannot test some things that are written in the prose. For example, a > AU must not fire Storage events when first populating the preferences > attribute. This is impossible to express in IDL.
I complete agree that manual tests bring a lot of value, but I think it would be unwise to refuse automated tests that express exactly what the spec expresses — in particular, they can be extremely useful to detect bugs in the WebIDL defined in the specs, bugs that are extremely unlikely to be detected through manual testing. In other words, I don’t see why manually and automatically created tests are mutually exclusive, and I see very clearly how they can complete each other. Dom
