David Schmidt wrote: > I disagree that the code *should* look like that. That is nice code if > you *know* that a dialog has appeared. The problem is that after > performing a click_no_wait you don't know what kind of popup may appear > (or even IF one will appear). If you were a tester, i think you would know what kind of popup you were expecting.
At issue here is how to make the API for Watir intuitive for testing. This is not a question of implementation, but rather of psychology and design and usage. I like to be open to a broad range of views on how to use Watir for testing and i have occassionally made it work to support testing practices that i may not personally appreciate. Testers and developers using watir for testing get one vote. Developers using watir to build web-scraping apps get zero votes. This is not a democracy. It is a testing tool. If we can find a way to also make Watir usable for other uses, that that is fine. But it will not be optimized at the risk of making it less intuitive for testers. Bret _______________________________________________ Wtr-general mailing list Wtr-general@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
