- rgoulter 2 months ago
It's a nice interface, and I like the idea of the environment having the test-editing inline with the context it's operating on.
But "UI tests - no code required!" is something I see in various places. It seems to imply the hardest part of creating and maintaining UI-level tests is writing the code. It reminds me of "PHP was originally designed explicitly for non-programmers (and, reading between the lines, non-programs)" from https://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/
- HashHishBang 2 months ago
When I was first starting out as a SET/QAA/whatever it's called now I had to deal with the joys of record/playback tests from Selenium. It's a bloody nightmare to debug someone else's actions that have been translated, often poorly, to code by a machine.
Other than being able to whip something up in 30 seconds I haven't found a benefit. From the CSS identifiers that are selected to the backing code there just aren't positives. Unless you consider the 30 seconds of dev time you "saved" by converting it into 30 minutes of tech debt to be a positive.
- babaganoosh89 2 months ago
Is the preview frame an iframe? What if your site uses iframe busting?
- hanniabu 2 months ago
What's the process like when you update the UI? Does it list the interactions that broke and give you the opportunity to view/edit/delete each individually?
- lionpixel 2 months ago
Wow that’s looks pretty cool!