John Spann wrote:
Hi Linda,
I think you misunderstood Marc's question. He is asking why you are trying to combine the two
tests into 1. Do you really need to avoid calling &goToSite; twice? Creating two tests does
not have the same overhead as opening two "real" browsers. What Marc is trying to say
is the overhead of having two tests and calling &goToSite; twice should be minimal.
The problem with having a single webtest continue running test steps if a step fails
is you usually can't continue. Each webtest is a sequence of steps that must be
executed in a specific order and a failed step leaves you in an inconsistent state.
Clicking a link brings you to a new page. If that link could not be clicked or the
page could not be loaded, all steps following the <clickLink> most likely won't
work and most certainly won't be executed on the page you intended them to be
executed on.
I suggest you create macrodefs (preferred - see the definitions folder created by
the sample project) or entities (like &goToSite;, although these become harder
to maintain and reuse over time) for frequently used flows. That way you can write
the sequence of steps to get to a particular page once, then write multiple tests
for that page.
Also, if you are trying to test validity of links on a particular page, you may want
to try the verifyLinks step:
<http://webtest.canoo.com/webtest/manual/verifyLinks.html>.
G'day
Thank you very much, I figured there was something there I wasn't catching.
I think I was abusing webtest, so I'll stop that.
Thanks again, I really appreciate it guys.
--
ldb
_______________________________________________
WebTest mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.canoo.com/mailman/listinfo/webtest
