Cool, seems Selenium RC does the format conversion automatically. For Groovy meta programming, you can use methodMissing or interceptor. I would suggest you create a new class to forward all custom methods to Dispatcher using same way as the Dispatcher class. The only thing is what if you want to add extra events to the custom methods.
Let us be agile, first try to implement couple methods and then you will see more clearly about the implementation details. Thanks, Jian On Jan 21, 4:30 pm, Mikhail Koryak <[email protected]> wrote: > it does not need to convert into pipe format. > for example take a look at one of my custom jquery methods: > > def String getSelectorText(String jqSelector){ > String[] arr = [jqSelector]; > String st = commandProcessor.doCommand("getSelectorText", > arr); > return st; > } > > so you need to pass in the method name, and an array of arguments to > the method, and it returns a string. > > On Jan 21, 4:27 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > It wouldn't be difficult to use Groovy meta programming to forward > > the > > missing method to the Dispatcher class, or we can create a custom > > class for > > this purpose. > > > The difficult part would still be Selenium RC part. If I remember > > correctly, > > it needs to convert the method into pipe format command. For custom > > methods, > > do you have a generic way to do the conversion? > > > Thanks, > > > Jian > > > On Jan 21, 3:44 pm, Mikhail Koryak <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > How hard would it be to use groovy to make tellurium be user- > > > extendable. what i mean, is selenium has CustomSelenium where you can > > > add some functions and as long as you have them in the user-extensions > > > you can call custom functions. > > > > With tellurium this is not as easy because you have to go through the > > > accessor or the dispatcher and modify multiple files to make a simple > > > change. Can we use the power of groovy to make this easier? > > > > so if a method is not found, and it returns a value, call the > > > dispatcher with the method, and if it returns a void, call the > > > accessor, or something like that? What are your thoughts? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tellurium-users" 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/tellurium-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
