as an aside: having tried out this "same API" recently, its a bit of a mirage.
The method names are the same but the semantics are pretty different. Even some of the arities are different :P (e.g. the "visit" session method, used to visit a url) I hope that they're trying to converge them more (I even did a bit of hacking towards it myself) but the Rails integration session and selenium (both of which webrat wraps) are fundamentally different in some ways, so as always if its important to you: caveat emptor :lachie http://smartbomb.com.au http://www.flickr.com/photos/lachie/ On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Julio Cesar Ody <[email protected]> wrote: > > For clarification: > > http://gitrdoc.com/brynary/webrat/tree/master > > "Use the same API for Browser Simulator and real Selenium tests using > Webrat::Selenium when necessary (eg. for testing AJAX interactions)" > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Pat Allan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I *think* so - but I must admit, in-browser/js testing is an area I >> need to work on (not that I write much js these days). The standard >> setup is to use Webrat, which imitates a browser from Rails' >> perspective, and provides easy ways to follow links, press buttons, >> fill in forms, etc. >> >> I have heard of people tying it into selenium though, as a webrat >> replacement (or rather, making webrat talk to selenium, I think) >> >> -- >> Pat >> >> On 02/04/2009, at 1:43 PM, Torm3nt wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi Pat, >>> >>> Cheers for the info - is this something you combine with selenium? >>> >>> >>> Kirk >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Pat Allan <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd be more than happy to rave about Cucumber - but I won't be at the >>>> next meeting (or several after that) unfortunately. >>>> >>>> Kirk: I find it to be a really clean and clear way to test features >>>> by >>>> stepping through multiple pages (I still write model and controller >>>> specs as well). I've been using it for about 6 months, and it quickly >>>> became part of my core testing setup. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Pat >>>> >>>> On 02/04/2009, at 1:35 PM, Torm3nt wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm not from melbourne but I think this is an interesting discussion >>>>> in it's own right. I'm still yet to be convinced why cucumber is a >>>>> good idea, considering (to me) it looks to complicate things, rather >>>>> than simplify. That said, I haven't actually played with it yet so >>>>> this is just first impressions =P >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Mike Bailey <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> A couple of months Pete asked the Melbourne Ruby Group what people >>>>>> are >>>>>> excited about. >>>>>> >>>>>> A lot of people mentioned testing: cucumber, rspec, shoulda, >>>>>> integrity ci, >>>>>> mocks, not using mocks, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Would anyone else be interested in a night dedicated to short talks >>>>>> introducing peoples favourite test tools/practices and why they >>>>>> love them? >>>>>> >>>>>> Is testing in Ruby more enjoyable than in other languages? Perhaps >>>>>> the night >>>>>> could interest non-ruby programmers also? >>>>>> >>>>>> - Mike >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> > >> >> >> > >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
