Then How would I access your code? After accessing my code, should I use it 
in WATIR library to check how is the performance? By the way where is your 
new code? 

On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 8:22:53 PM UTC+5:30, Justin Ko wrote:
>
> Sorry, no, these changes are not available in 6.10.1.
>
> There are still changes I want to do for the simplify_locator branch. 
> However, if the current state solves your problem, I can see if I get 
> something merged in sooner.
>
> Justin
>
>
> On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 1:42:05 AM UTC-5, 
> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> This change available in recent water 6.10.1?
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 11:39:51 PM UTC+5:30, Justin Ko wrote:
>>>
>>> Rajagopalan, would you be able to see if the changes I have made in 
>>> https://github.com/jkotests/watir/tree/simplify_locator fixes the 
>>> performance problem for :visible_text?
>>>
>>> I think the problem is where we filter elements:
>>>
>>> def filter_elements_by_locator(elements, visible = nil, visible_text = 
>>> nil, idx = nil, tag_name: nil, filter: :first) 
>>>   elements.select! { |el| visible == el.displayed? } unless visible.nil? 
>>>   elements.select! { |el| visible_text === el.text } unless visible_text
>>> .nil? 
>>>   elements.select! { |el| element_validator.validate(el, {tag_name: 
>>> tag_name}) } unless tag_name.nil? 
>>>   filter == :first ? elements[idx || 0] : elements 
>>> end
>>>
>>>
>>> We apply the filter to every element found, even if you just want the 
>>> first one. The changes I have in progress switch this to be lazy - ie we 
>>> would only need to inspect the first link that matches. For a page with a 
>>> lot of links, I believe this would increase performance a lot.
>>>
>>> Justin
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 12:56:46 PM UTC-5, rajagopalan madasami 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am using watir over selenium for two reasons, one reason is waiting 
>>>> timings are maintained by local language binding but selenium is 
>>>> maintaining timing from driver level , since selenium uses the timing from 
>>>> driver level it differs from Firefox to Chrome, but since WATIR is 
>>>> maintaining timing from local language binding it doesn't matter whether I 
>>>> use Chrome or Firefox. Another reason is stale element problem, WATIR 
>>>> relocates the element when element  goes to stale other than that I don't 
>>>> use any other features of WATIR because everything else is time consuming 
>>>> like xpah formation. So if you simply allow element () to access selenium 
>>>> locators directly it would be useful for me rather than unnecessary 
>>>> deprecating what word extraordinary.
>>>>
>>>> On 12-Dec-2017 11:06 PM, "Titus Fortner" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey Chuck,
>>>>>
>>>>> Especially with Watir 6, there are some good synchronization reasons 
>>>>> to prefer Watir over default selenium, even if not taking advantage of 
>>>>> the 
>>>>> improved encapsulation of the subclasses or the more advanced locator 
>>>>> strategies. Though, not so many that it might not be worth it for him to 
>>>>> roll his own at that point. Depends on how much else in the Watir 
>>>>> ecosystem 
>>>>> he is relying on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Titus
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 11:20:28 AM UTC-6, Chuck van der 
>>>>> Linden wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> bah... need to be able to edit... I confused using .link method of 
>>>>>> watir with the :link locator type of Selenium... please disregard the 
>>>>>> confusion over that sentence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Point being however that you seem wedded to directly using .element 
>>>>>> and selenium selection methods, so the question of why even use Watir as 
>>>>>> opposed to Selenium, given your preferences, still exists. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 9:17:10 AM UTC-8, Chuck van der 
>>>>>> Linden wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:29:52 PM UTC-8, 
>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you please pay a little attention to the ongoing conversation? 
>>>>>>>> The conversation is not about using element() or using link() 
>>>>>>>> function, the 
>>>>>>>> conversation is about performance issue while I use visible text. I am 
>>>>>>>> ready to use visible text If it does the good performance but it's not 
>>>>>>>> doing it, I am trying to click a link which takes minutes to click 
>>>>>>>> that 
>>>>>>>> link but when I use link locator it clicks instantly. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  You say that, yet every code example I see from you uses .element
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then we have statements like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Yes, I agree using b.link() increases the performance, But I 
>>>>>>>> completely against the idea of not using the link: locator of selenium.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (given the sentence makes no sense if parsed using the double 
>>>>>>> negative (in which case you would already be using .link, which you are 
>>>>>>> not),  I presume that 'not' in the above is a typo) 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So despite people telling you to use .link, you seem insistent on 
>>>>>>> using .element.  which is basically the same as using raw Webdriver 
>>>>>>> instead 
>>>>>>> of Watir.  So frankly I don't think my question is that out of line.  
>>>>>>> If 
>>>>>>> you insist on using .element, and are as you stated 'completely against 
>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>> idea' of using the watir API, then why use Watir and not just use 
>>>>>>> webdriver 
>>>>>>> directly?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In terms of performance: 
>>>>>>> As Titus asked earlier, can you provide a code example that 
>>>>>>> demonstrates the performance difference you are claiming to see?  not a 
>>>>>>> discussion of code, but actual code against an actual site. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Before posting, please read http://watir.com/support. In short: 
>>>>> search before you ask, be nice.
>>>>>  
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/watir-general
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> --- 
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>> Groups "Watir General" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>>

-- 
-- 
Before posting, please read http://watir.com/support. In short: search before 
you ask, be nice.

[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/watir-general
[email protected]

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Watir General" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to