Assuming I do have multiple controls with different IDs,
let example1 = this.byId("Example1"),
example2 = this.byId("Example2");
Due to the reason that later in the function, example1 accesses the .getValueState and example2 the .getValue method:
if (example1.getValueState() === "Error") { return true; }
if (!example2.getValue()) { return false; }
It would require to stub them both. However, when I do that, I do receive the error:
Attempted to wrap byId which is already wrapped
How do I stub multiple byIds?
Use withArgs to distinguish between the stubs that need to be returned:
const oViewStub = sinon.createStubInstance(View);
const oExample1Stub = sinon.createStubInstance(Input);
const oExample2Stub = sinon.createStubInstance(Input);
oViewStub.byId.withArgs("Example1").returns(oExample1Stub);
oViewStub.byId.withArgs("Example2").returns(oExample2Stub);
Related
I've come across different types of syntax for Protractor's Page Objects and I was wondering, what's their background and which way is suggested.
This is the official PageObject syntax from Protractor's tutorial. I like it the most, because it's clear and readable:
use strict;
var AngularHomepage = function() {
var nameInput = element(by.model('yourName'));
var greeting = element(by.binding('yourName'));
this.get = function() {
browser.get('http://www.angularjs.org');
};
this.setName = function(name) {
nameInput.sendKeys(name);
};
this.getGreeting = function() {
return greeting.getText();
};
};
module.exports = AngularHomepage;
However, I've also found this kind:
'use strict';
var AngularPage = function () {
browser.get('http://www.angularjs.org');
};
AngularPage.prototype = Object.create({}, {
todoText: { get: function () { return element(by.model('todoText')); }},
addButton: { get: function () { return element(by.css('[value="add"]')); }},
yourName: { get: function () { return element(by.model('yourName')); }},
greeting: { get: function () { return element(by.binding('yourName')).getText(); }},
todoList: { get: function () { return element.all(by.repeater('todo in todos')); }},
typeName: { value: function (keys) { return this.yourName.sendKeys(keys); }} ,
todoAt: { value: function (idx) { return this.todoList.get(idx).getText(); }},
addTodo: { value: function (todo) {
this.todoText.sendKeys(todo);
this.addButton.click();
}}
});
module.exports = AngularPage;
What are the pros/cons of those two approaches (apart from readability)? Is the second one up-to-date? I've seen that WebdriverIO uses that format.
I've also heard from one guy on Gitter that the first entry is inefficient. Can someone explain to me why?
Page Object Model framework becomes popular mainly because of:
Less code duplicate
Easy to maintain for long
High readability
So, generally we develop test framework(pom) for our convenience based on testing scope and needs by following suitable framework(pom) patterns. There are NO such rules which says that, strictly we should follow any framework.
NOTE: Framework is, to make our task easy, result oriented and effective
In your case, 1st one looks good and easy. And it does not leads to confusion or conflict while in maintenance phase of it.
Example: 1st case-> element locator's declaration happens at top of each page. It would be easy to change in case any element locator changed in future.
Whereas in 2nd case, locators declared in block level(scatter across the page). It would be a time taking process to identify and change the locators if required in future.
So, Choose which one you feel comfortable based on above points.
I prefer to use ES6 class syntax (http://es6-features.org/#ClassDefinition). Here, i prepared some simple example how i work with page objects using ES6 classes and some helpful tricks.
var Page = require('../Page')
var Fragment = require('../Fragment')
class LoginPage extends Page {
constructor() {
super('/login');
this.emailField = $('input.email');
this.passwordField = $('input.password');
this.submitButton = $('button.login');
this.restorePasswordButton = $('button.restore');
}
login(username, password) {
this.email.sendKeys(username);
this.passwordField.sendKeys(password);
this.submit.click();
}
restorePassword(email) {
this.restorePasswordButton.click();
new RestorePasswordModalWindow().submitEmail(email);
}
}
class RestorePasswordModalWindow extends Fragment {
constructor() {
//Passing element that will be used as this.fragment;
super($('div.modal'));
}
submitEmail(email) {
//This how you can use methods from super class, just example - it is not perfect.
this.waitUntilAppear(2000, 'Popup should appear before manipulating');
//I love to use fragments, because they provides small and reusable parts of page.
this.fragment.$('input.email').sendKeys(email);
this.fragment.$('button.submit')click();
this.waitUntilDisappear(2000, 'Popup should disappear before manipulating');
}
}
module.exports = LoginPage;
// Page.js
class Page {
constructor(url){
//this will be part of page to add to base URL.
this.url = url;
}
open() {
//getting baseURL from params object in config.
browser.get(browser.params.baseURL + this.url);
return this; // this will allow chaining methods.
}
}
module.exports = Page;
// Fragment.js
class Fragment {
constructor(fragment) {
this.fragment = fragment;
}
//Example of some general methods for all fragments. Notice that default method parameters will work only in node.js 6.x
waitUntilAppear(timeout=5000, message) {
browser.wait(this.EC.visibilityOf(this.fragment), timeout, message);
}
waitUntilDisappear(timeout=5000, message) {
browser.wait(this.EC.invisibilityOf(this.fragment), timeout, message);
}
}
module.exports = Fragment;
// Then in your test:
let loginPage = new LoginPage().open(); //chaining in action - getting LoginPage instance in return.
loginPage.restorePassword('batman#gmail.com'); // all logic is hidden in Fragment object
loginPage.login('superman#gmail.com')
In standard ampersand-rest-collection you define the url endpoint as a property and [getOr]Fetch() queries using that url.
I have two endpoints for the same model. Essentially, when I am pulling a list of objects I use one url end point, but when I am pulling individual objects I need to use a different one. Is it possible to tell fetch() which url to use in each case?
DocStore = _.extend(docs, {
url: [could this be an object or array?]
getOne: function(docId) {
return this.fetchById(docId); //should use /doc/:docId
},
getMany: function(groupId) {
return DocStore.getOrFetch(groupId); //should use /group/:groupId/docs
}
});
Like many backbone properties you can use a function for the url property instead of a string to return whatever dynamic result you need.
For example you can do something like the following
url : function () {
return this.fetchingMany ? '/group/' : '/doc'
},
getOne: function(docId) {
this.fetchingMany = false;
this.fetch(); //should use /doc/:docId
},
getMany: function(groupId) {
this.fetchingMany = true;
this.fetch(); //should use /group/:groupId/docs
}
I'm trying to return window.performance object from the web page back to casper's scope with the following code but I'm getting null. Can someone explain why?
performance = casper.evaluate ->
return window.performance
#echo performance
PhantomJS 1.x doesn't implement window.performance, so you can't use it.
PhantomJS 2.0.0 implements it, but it doesn't implement the window.performance.toJSON() function. The problem with PhantomJS is that you have to access this information through evaluate(), but it has the following limitation:
Note: The arguments and the return value to the evaluate function must be a simple primitive object. The rule of thumb: if it can be serialized via JSON, then it is fine.
Closures, functions, DOM nodes, etc. will not work!
You will have to find your own way of serializing this in the page context and passing it to the outside (JavaScript):
var performance = casper.evaluate(function(){
var t = window.performance.timing;
var n = window.performance.navigation;
return {
timing: {
connectStart: t.connectStart,
connectEnd: t.connectEnd,
...
},
navigation: {
type: n.type,
redirectCount: n.redirectCount
},
...
};
});
or look for a deep copy algorithm that produces a serializable object (from here):
var perf = casper.evaluate(function(){
function cloneObject(obj) {
var clone = {};
for(var i in obj) {
if(typeof(obj[i])=="object" && obj[i] != null)
clone[i] = cloneObject(obj[i]);
else
clone[i] = obj[i];
}
return clone;
}
return cloneObject(window.performance);
});
console.log(JSON.stringify(perf, undefined, 4));
I am having trouble in validating and reseting some fields based on the role of a user.
I am trying to develop a rest api with grails and my problem appears when i try to reset some fields based on the role of an user. I send a json with the desired "not allowed" changes via PUT to the controller. I modify the not allowed fields to ones that are correct for me and then call .save() and the "not alowed" fields are updated with their sent value, not with the modified by me values. Here is the code.
THE MODEL
package phonebook
class User {
String firstName
String lastName
String phoneNo
String address
String email
String password
boolean active = false
String hash
String authToken = ""
String role = "user"
static hasMany = [contacts:Contact]
static constraints = {
firstName(blank: false)
lastName(blank: false)
address(blank: true)
phoneNo(unique: true)
email(blank: false, unique: true)
password(blank: false)
role(blank: false, inList: ["user", "admin"])
hash(blank: true)
authToken(blank: true)
active(inList:[true,false])
}
}
THE METHOD FROM CONTROLLER:
#Transactional
def update(User userInstance) {
if (!isAuthenticated()){
notAllowed()
return
}
if (userInstance == null) {
notFound()
return
}
//if(isAdmin()){
def userBackup = User.findById(userInstance.id)
userInstance.role = userBackup.role
userInstance.active = userBackup.active
userInstance.hash = userBackup.hash
userInstance.authToken = userBackup.authToken
//}
if (userInstance.hasErrors()) {
respond userInstance.errors, view:'edit'
return
}
userInstance.save flush:false
request.withFormat {
'*'{ respond userInstance, [status: OK] }
}
}
THE JSON SENT VIA PUT
{
"id":"1",
"firstName": "Modified Name 23",
"role":"admin",
"active":"true",
"hash":"asdasd"
}
The above code should not modify my values for hash or active or role even if they are sent.
Any ideas?
Thanks.
The reason your changes are being saved is because by default any changes made to a domain instance will be flushed at the end of the session. This is known as open session in view with automatic session flushing. I recommend you do some reading on some of the main issues people face with GORM.
Proper use of discard may solve your issue. Discard your instance changes before you exit your controller.
For example:
if (!isAuthenticated()){
notAllowed()
userInstance.discard()
return
}
Edit
Based on conversation in the comments this perhaps may be the way to address your issue. A combination of discard and attach.
userInstance.discard()
def userBackup = User.findById(userInstance.id)
userInstance.role = userBackup.role
userInstance.active = userBackup.active
userInstance.hash = userBackup.hash
userInstance.authToken = userBackup.authToken
userInstance.attach()
I was helped by this method.
getPersistentValue
Example
def update(ShopItem shopItemInstance) {
if (shopItemInstance == null) {
notFound()
return
}
if (!shopItemInstance.itemPhoto){
shopItemInstance.itemPhoto =
shopItemInstance.getPersistentValue("itemPhoto");
}
if (shopItemInstance.hasErrors()) {
respond shopItemInstance.errors, view:'edit'
return
}
shopItemInstance.save flush:true
redirect(action: "show", id: shopItemInstance.id)
}
In your case:
userInstance.role = userInstance.getPersistentValue("role")
userInstance.active = userInstance.getPersistentValue("active")
userInstance.hash = userInstance.getPersistentValue("hash")
userInstance.authToken = userInstance.getPersistentValue("authToken")
It's better if you'll use the command objects feature. You can bind a command object with the request payload, validate it and than find and update the domain object.
You can find more details here:
http://grails.org/doc/2.3.x/guide/theWebLayer.html#commandObjects
And off the record you shoudn't use #Transactional in your controller. You can move that code into a service.
Eq:
def update(Long id, UserCommand cmd){
// Grails will map the json object into the command object and will call the validate() method if the class is annotated with #Validatable
}
I'm creating a backbone app that's connecting to a RESTful backend. When I call save() on a model, it sends the post data as stringified JSON:
{"firstName":"first","lastName":"last","Email":"email#gmail.com"}
but my server expects it to be formatted like a querystring:
firstName=first&lastName=last&Email=email#gmail.com
is there a way to have backbone send it differently?
Backbone doesn't provide anything like this out of the box.
But is easy to override and customize it to your needs.
Have a look to the source code:
http://documentcloud.github.com/backbone/docs/backbone.html
and check out that calling save, it will trigger a sync call in the background.
So what you need is to override Backbone.sync function with your own.
I would modify the part of:
if (!options.data && model && (method == 'create' || method == 'update')) {
params.contentType = 'application/json';
params.data = JSON.stringify(model.toJSON());
}
with
if (!options.data && model && (method == 'create' || method == 'update')) {
params.contentType = 'application/json';
params.data = $.param(model); // <-- CHANGED
}
Notice I'm using jQuery param
If you want to use a custom function, check this question:
Query-string encoding of a Javascript Object
[Update.]
No need to modify directly. Better override it with your own function 'Backbone.sync'
Check the "TODO" example of the Backbone repository. It has a localStorage.js file that overrides Backbone.sync function https://github.com/documentcloud/backbone/tree/master/examples
I ran into this problem at work and the Backbone.emulateJSON didn't work for me either. With some help I was able to come up with this workaround. We overrode the Backbone.ajax function and changed the contentType to "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" and used $.param to properly serialize the data.
Backbone.ajax = function() {
if(arguments[0].data && arguments[0].contentType == "application/json"){
arguments[0].data = $.param(JSON.parse(arguments[0].data));
arguments[0].contentType = "application/x-www-form-urlencoded";
}
return Backbone.$.ajax.apply(Backbone.$, arguments);
}
maybe this can help you,try:
http://backbonejs.org/#Sync-emulateJSON
I have done this by overriding model's sync function:
var MyModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
"sync": function(method, model, options) {
if (method == "update" || method == "create") {
options = options ? _.clone(options) : {};
options['data'] = $.param(this['attributes']);
}
var arguments = [method, model, options];
return Backbone.sync.apply(this, arguments);
}
});
I find solutions, see :
I use
Backbone.emulateJSON = true;
I write the "update" case:
options.url = "/user/"+Math.random(1, 1000);
options.type = "POST";
//.1/2 WORK
//options.data = (model instanceof Backbone.Model)?model.toJSON():{};
options.data = model.toJSON();
break;
Backbone.sync uses the jQuery.ajax function, so we can modify the jqXHR or data that is sended to the server (via beforeSend).
var oldSync = Backbone.Model.prototype.sync;
var SomeModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
url: 'test.json',
defaults: {
id: 1,
foo: 'test'
},
sync: function (method, model, options) {
// options are passed to the jQuery.ajax
_.extend(options, {
emulateHTTP: true,
emulateJSON: false,
beforeSend: function(xhr, settings) {
// settings.data is a body of our request.
if (_.isString(settings.data)) {
// settings.data is a JSON-string like '{"id":1, "foo":"test"}'
settings.data = Backbone.$.parseJSON(settings.data);
}
settings.data = Backbone.$.param(settings.data);
// settings.data is 'id=1&foo=test'
}
});
oldSync.apply(this, arguments);
}
});
var model = new SomeModel();
model.save();
Actually we can create a mixin! :)