Software development |
---|
Core activities |
Paradigms and models |
Methodologies and frameworks |
Supporting disciplines |
Practices |
Tools |
Standards and Bodies of Knowledge |
Glossaries |
In software testing, test automation is the use of software separate from the software being tested to control the execution of tests and the comparison of actual outcomes with predicted outcomes.[1] Test automation can automate some repetitive but necessary tasks in a formalized testing process already in place, or perform additional testing that would be difficult to do manually. Test automation is critical for continuous delivery and continuous testing.
There are many approaches to test automation, however below are the general approaches used widely:
- Graphical user interface testing. A testing framework that generates user interface events such as keystrokes and mouse clicks, and observes the changes that result in the user interface, to validate that the observable behavior of the program is correct.
- API driven testing. A testing framework that uses a programming interface to the application to validate the behaviour under test. Typically API driven testing bypasses application user interface altogether. It can also be testing public (usually) interfaces to classes, modules or libraries are tested with a variety of input arguments to validate that the results that are returned are correct.
Carrier serial number breakdown. One way to generate test cases automatically is model-based testing through use of a model of the system for test case generation, but research continues into a variety of alternative methodologies for doing so.[citation needed] In some cases, the model-based approach enables non-technical users to create automated business test cases in plain English so that no programming of any kind is needed in order to configure them for multiple operating systems, browsers, and smart devices.[2]
What to automate, when to automate, or even whether one really needs automation are crucial decisions which the testing (or development) team must make.[3] A multi-vocal literature review of 52 practitioner and 26 academic sources found that five main factors to consider in test automation decision are: 1) System Under Test (SUT), 2) the types and numbers of tests, 3) test-tool, 4) human and organizational topics, and 5) cross-cutting factors. The most frequent individual factors identified in the study were: need for regression testing, economic factors, and maturity of SUT.[4]
A growing trend in software development is the use of unit testing frameworks such as the xUnit frameworks (for example, JUnit and NUnit) that allow the execution of unit tests to determine whether various sections of the code are acting as expected under various circumstances. Test cases describe tests that need to be run on the program to verify that the program runs as expected.
Test automation, mostly using unit testing, is a key feature of extreme programming and agile software development, where it is known as test-driven development (TDD) or test-first development. Unit tests can be written to define the functionality before the code is written. However, these unit tests evolve and are extended as coding progresses, issues are discovered and the code is subjected to refactoring.[5] Only when all the tests for all the demanded features pass is the code considered complete. Proponents argue that it produces software that is both more reliable and less costly than code that is tested by manual exploration.[citation needed] It is considered more reliable because the code coverage is better, and because it is run constantly during development rather than once at the end of a waterfall development cycle. The developer discovers defects immediately upon making a change, when it is least expensive to fix. Finally, code refactoring is safer when unit testing is used; transforming the code into a simpler form with less code duplication, but equivalent behavior, is much less likely to introduce new defects when the refactored code is covered by unit tests.
Some software testing tasks (such as extensive low-level interface regression testing) can be laborious and time-consuming to do manually. In addition, a manual approach might not always be effective in finding certain classes of defects. Test automation offers a possibility to perform these types of testing effectively.
Once automated tests have been developed, they can be run quickly and repeatedly. Many times, this can be a cost-effective method for regression testing of software products that have a long maintenance life. Even minor patches over the lifetime of the application can cause existing features to break which were working at an earlier point in time.
Test automation tools can be expensive and are usually employed in combination with manual testing. Test automation can be made cost-effective in the long term, especially when used repeatedly in regression testing. A good candidate for test automation is a test case for common flow of an application, as it is required to be executed (regression testing) every time an enhancement is made in the application. Test automation reduces the effort associated with manual testing. Manual effort is needed to develop and maintain automated checks, as well as reviewing test results.
In automated testing, the test engineer or software quality assurance person must have software coding ability since the test cases are written in the form of source code which when run produce output according to the assertions that are a part of it. Some test automation tools allow for test authoring to be done by keywords instead of coding, which do not require programming.
- 4Framework approach in automation
API driven testing[edit]
API testing is also being widely used by software testers due to the difficulty of creating and maintaining GUI-based automation testing. It involves directly testing APIs as part of integration testing, to determine if they meet expectations for functionality, reliability, performance, and security.[6] Since APIs lack a GUI, API testing is performed at the message layer.[7] API testing is considered critical when an API serves as the primary interface to application logic since GUI tests can be difficult to maintain with the short release cycles and frequent changes commonly used with agile software development and DevOps.[8][9]
Continuous testing[edit]
Continuous testing is the process of executing automated tests as part of the software delivery pipeline to obtain immediate feedback on the business risks associated with a software release candidate.[10][11] For Continuous Testing, the scope of testing extends from validating bottom-up requirements or user stories to assessing the system requirements associated with overarching business goals.[12]
Graphical User Interface (GUI) testing[edit]
Many test automation tools provide record and playback features that allow users to interactively record user actions and replay them back any number of times, comparing actual results to those expected. The advantage of this approach is that it requires little or no software development. This approach can be applied to any application that has a graphical user interface. However, reliance on these features poses major reliability and maintainability problems. Relabelling a button or moving it to another part of the window may require the test to be re-recorded. Record and playback also often adds irrelevant activities or incorrectly records some activities.[citation needed]
A variation on this type of tool is for testing of web sites. Here, the 'interface' is the web page. However, such a framework utilizes entirely different techniques because it is rendering HTML and listening to DOM Events instead of operating system events. Headless browsers or solutions based on Selenium Web Driver are normally used for this purpose.[13][14][15]
Insidious: Chapter 3 is a 2015 supernatural horror film written and directed by Leigh Whannell in his directorial debut. It is a prequel to the first two films and the. Sidney Allison at an event for Insidious: Chapter 3 (2015) Leigh Whannell and Stefanie Scott in Insidious: Chapter 3 (2015) Stefanie Scott in Insidious: Chapter 3. Insidious chapter 3.
Another variation of this type of test automation tool is for testing mobile applications. This is very useful given the number of different sizes, resolutions, and operating systems used on mobile phones. For this variation, a framework is used in order to instantiate actions on the mobile device and to gather results of the actions.[16][better source needed]
Another variation is script-less test automation that does not use record and playback, but instead builds a model[clarification needed] of the application and then enables the tester to create test cases by simply inserting test parameters and conditions, which requires no scripting skills.
Framework approach in automation[edit]
A test automation framework is an integrated system that sets the rules of automation of a specific product. This system integrates the function libraries, test data sources, object details and various reusable modules. These components act as small building blocks which need to be assembled to represent a business process. The framework provides the basis of test automation and simplifies the automation effort.
The main advantage of a framework of assumptions, concepts and tools that provide support for automated software testing is the low cost for maintenance. If there is change to any test case then only the test case file needs to be updated and the driver Script and startup script will remain the same. Ideally, there is no need to update the scripts in case of changes to the application.
Choosing the right framework/scripting technique helps in maintaining lower costs. The costs associated with test scripting are due to development and maintenance efforts. The approach of scripting used during test automation has effect on costs.
![Web ui test automation tools Web ui test automation tools](https://www.dotnetcurry.com/images/visualstudio/d13203a07c17_79C8/testing-automation-process.png)
Various framework/scripting techniques are generally used:
- Linear (procedural code, possibly generated by tools like those that use record and playback)
- Structured (uses control structures - typically ‘if-else’, ‘switch’, ‘for’, ‘while’ conditions/ statements)
- Data-driven (data is persisted outside of tests in a database, spreadsheet, or other mechanism)
- Hybrid (two or more of the patterns above are used)
- Agile automation framework
The Testing framework is responsible for:[17]
- defining the format in which to express expectations
- creating a mechanism to hook into or drive the application under test
- executing the tests
- reporting results
Test automation interface[edit]
Test automation interface are platforms that provide a single workspace for incorporating multiple testing tools and frameworks for System/Integration testing of application under test. The goal of Test Automation Interface is to simplify the process of mapping tests to business criteria without coding coming in the way of the process. Test automation interface are expected to improve the efficiency and flexibility of maintaining test scripts.[18]
Test Automation Interface consists of the following core modules:
- Interface Engine
- Interface Environment
- Object Repository
Interface engine[edit]
Interface engines are built on top of Interface Environment. Interface engine consists of a parser and a test runner. The parser is present to parse the object files coming from the object repository into the test specific scripting language. The test runner executes the test scripts using a test harness.[18]
Object repository[edit]
Object repositories are a collection of UI/Application object data recorded by the testing tool while exploring the application under test.[18]
Defining boundaries between automation framework and a testing tool[edit]
Tools are specifically designed to target some particular test environment, such as Windows and web automation tools, etc. Tools serve as a driving agent for an automation process. However, an automation framework is not a tool to perform a specific task, but rather infrastructure that provides the solution where different tools can do their job in a unified manner. This provides a common platform for the automation engineer.
There are various types of frameworks. They are categorized on the basis of the automation component they leverage. These are:
- Code-driven testing
What to test[edit]
Testing tools can help automate tasks such as product installation, test data creation, GUI interaction, problem detection (consider parsing or polling agents equipped with test oracles), defect logging, etc., without necessarily automating tests in an end-to-end fashion.
One must keep satisfying popular requirements when thinking of test automation:
- Platform and OS independence
- Data driven capability (Input Data, Output Data, Metadata)
- Customization Reporting (DB Data Base Access, Crystal Reports)
- Easy debugging and logging
- Version control friendly – minimal binary files
- Extensible & Customization (Open APIs to be able to integrate with other tools)
- Common Driver (For example, in the Java development ecosystem, that means Ant or Maven and the popular IDEs). This enables tests to integrate with the developers' workflows.
- Support unattended test runs for integration with build processes and batch runs. Continuous integration servers require this.
- Email Notifications like bounce messages
- Support distributed execution environment (distributed test bed)
- Distributed application support (distributed SUT)
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^Kolawa, Adam; Huizinga, Dorota (2007). Automated Defect Prevention: Best Practices in Software Management. Wiley-IEEE Computer Society Press. p. 74. ISBN978-0-470-04212-0.
- ^Proceedings from the 5th International Conference on Software Testing and Validation (ICST). Software Competence Center Hagenberg. 'Test Design: Lessons Learned and Practical Implications. doi:10.1109/IEEESTD.2008.4578383. ISBN978-0-7381-5746-7.
- ^Brian Marick. 'When Should a Test Be Automated?'. StickyMinds.com. Retrieved 2009-08-20.
- ^Garousi, Vahid; Mäntylä, Mika V. (2016-08-01). 'When and what to automate in software testing? A multi-vocal literature review'. Information and Software Technology. 76: 92–117. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2016.04.015.
- ^Learning Test-Driven Development by Counting Lines; Bas Vodde & Lasse Koskela; IEEE Software Vol. 24, Issue 3, 2007
- ^Testing APIs protects applications and reputations, by Amy Reichert, SearchSoftwareQuality March 2015
- ^All About API Testing: An Interview with Jonathan Cooper, by Cameron Philipp-Edmonds, Stickyminds August 19, 2014
- ^The Forrester Wave™ Evaluation Of Functional Test Automation (FTA) Is Out And It's All About Going Beyond GUI Testing, by Diego Lo Giudice, Forrester April 23, 2015
- ^Produce Better Software by Using a Layered Testing Strategy, by Sean Kenefick, Gartner January 7, 2014
- ^Part of the Pipeline: Why Continuous Testing Is Essential, by Adam Auerbach, TechWell Insights August 2015
- ^The Relationship between Risk and Continuous Testing: An Interview with Wayne Ariola, by Cameron Philipp-Edmonds, Stickyminds December 2015
- ^DevOps: Are You Pushing Bugs to Clients Faster, by Wayne Ariola and Cynthia Dunlop, PNSQC October 2015
- ^Headless Testing with Browsers; https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/gui-and-headless-browsers/
- ^Headless Testing with PhantomJS;http://phantomjs.org/headless-testing.html
- ^Automated User Interface Testing; https://www.devbridge.com/articles/automated-user-interface-testing/
- ^Testmunk. 'A Beginner's Guide to Automated Mobile App Testing | Testmunk Blog'. blog.testmunk.com. Retrieved 2015-09-17.
- ^'Selenium Meet-Up 4/20/2010 Elisabeth Hendrickson on Robot Framework 1of2'. Retrieved 2010-09-26.
- ^ abc'Conquest: Interface for Test Automation Design'(PDF). Retrieved 2011-12-11.
- Notes
- Elfriede Dustin; et al. (1999). Automated Software Testing. Addison Wesley. ISBN978-0-201-43287-9.
- Elfriede Dustin; et al. (2009). Implementing Automated Software Testing. Addison Wesley. ISBN978-0-321-58051-1.
- Mark Fewster & Dorothy Graham (1999). Software Test Automation. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley. ISBN978-0-201-33140-0.
- Roman Savenkov: How to Become a Software Tester. Roman Savenkov Consulting, 2008, ISBN978-0-615-23372-7
- Hong Zhu; et al. (2008). AST '08: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Automation of Software Test. ACM Press. ISBN978-1-60558-030-2.
- Mosley, Daniel J.; Posey, Bruce (2002). Just Enough Software Test Automation. ISBN978-0130084682.
- Hayes, Linda G., 'Automated Testing Handbook', Software Testing Institute, 2nd Edition, March 2004
- Kaner, Cem, 'Architectures of Test Automation', August 2000
External links[edit]
- Test Automation Snake Oil by James Bach
- When Should a Test Be Automated? by Brian Marick
- Success Factors for Keyword Driven Testing by Hans Buwalda
- Automation That Learns: Making Your Computer Work for You by Jeremy Carey-Dressler
- Automation Testing Resources & Best Practices by Joe Colantonio
Note
This documentation is intended for .NET Framework developers who want to use the managed UI Automation classes defined in the System.Windows.Automation namespace. For the latest information about UI Automation, see Windows Automation API: UI Automation.
This overview describes how Microsoft UI Automation can be useful as a framework for programmatic access in automated testing scenarios.
UI Automation provides a unified object model that enables all user interface (UI) frameworks to expose complex and rich functionality in an accessible and easily automated manner.
UI Automation was developed as a successor to Microsoft Active Accessibility. Active Accessibility is an existing framework designed to provide a solution for making controls and applications accessible. Active Accessibility was not designed with test automation in mind even though it evolved into that role due to the very similar requirements of accessibility and automation. UI Automation, in addition to providing more refined solutions for accessibility, is also specifically designed to provide robust functionality for automated testing. For example, Active Accessibility relies on a single interface to both expose information about the UI and collect the information needed by AT products; UI Automation separates the two models.
Both a provider and client are required to implement UI Automation for it to be useful as an automated test tool. UI Automation providers are applications such as Microsoft Word, Excel, and other third-party applications or controls based on the Microsoft Windows operating system. UI Automation clients include automated test scripts and assistive technology applications.
Note
The intent of this overview is to showcase the new and improved automated testing capabilities of UI Automation. This overview is not intended to provide information on accessibility features and will not address accessibility other than where necessary.
UI Automation in a Provider
For a UI to be automated, a developer of an application or control must look at what actions an end-user can perform on the UI object using standard keyboard and mouse interaction.
Once these key actions have been identified, the corresponding UI Automation control patterns (that is, the control patterns that mirror the functionality and behavior of the UI element) should be implemented on the control. For example, user interaction with a combo box control (such as the run dialog) typically involves expanding and collapsing the combo box to hide or display a list of items, selecting an item from that list, or adding a new value via keyboard input.
Note
With other accessibility models, developers must gather information directly from individual buttons, menus, or other controls. Unfortunately, every control type comes in dozens of minor variations. In other words, even though ten variations of a pushbutton may all work the same way and perform the same function, they must all be treated as unique controls. There is no way to know that these controls are functionally equivalent. Control patterns were developed to represent these common control behaviors. For more information, see UI Automation Control Patterns Overview.
Implementing UI Automation
As mentioned earlier, without the unified model provided by UI Automation, test tools and developers are required to know framework-specific information in order to expose properties and behaviors of controls in that framework. Since there can be several different UI frameworks present at any single time within Windows operating systems, including Win32, Windows Forms, and Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF), it can be a daunting task to test multiple applications with controls that seem similar. For example, the following table outlines the framework-specific property names required to retrieve the name (or text) associated with a button control and shows the single equivalent UI Automation property.
UI Automation Control Type | UI Framework | Framework Specific Property | UI Automation Property |
---|---|---|---|
Button | Windows Presentation Foundation | Content | NameProperty |
Button | Win32 | Caption | NameProperty |
Image | HTML | alt | NameProperty |
UI Automation providers are responsible for mapping the framework-specific properties of their controls to the equivalent UI Automation properties.
Information on implementing UI Automation in a provider can be found at UI Automation Providers for Managed Code. Information on implementing control patterns is available at UI Automation Control Patterns and UI Automation Text Pattern.
UI Automation in a Client
The goal of many automated test tools and scenarios is the consistent and repeatable manipulation of the user interface. This can involve unit testing specific controls through to the recording and playback of test scripts that iterate through a series of generic actions on a group of controls.
A complication that arises from automated applications is the difficulty synchronizing a test with a dynamic target. For example, a list box control, such as one contained in the Windows Task Manager, that displays a list of currently running applications. Since the items in the list box are dynamically updated outside the control of the test application, attempting to repeat the selection of a specific item in the list box with any consistency is impossible. Similar issues can also arise when attempting to repeat simple focus changes in a UI that is outside the control of the test application.
Programmatic Access
Programmatic access provides the ability to imitate, through code, any interaction and experience exposed by traditional mouse and keyboard input. UI Automation enables programmatic access through five components:
The UI Automation tree facilitates navigation through the structure of the UI. The tree is built from the collection of hWnd's. For more information, see UI Automation Tree Overview
Automation elements are individual components in the UI. These can often be more granular than an hWnd. For more information, see UI Automation Control Types Overview.
Automation properties provide specific information about UI elements. For more information, see UI Automation Properties Overview.
Control patterns define a particular aspect of a control's functionality; they can consist of property, method, event, and structure information. For more information, see UI Automation Control Patterns Overview.
Automation events provide event notifications and information. For more information, see UI Automation Events Overview.
Key Properties for Test Automation
The ability to uniquely identify and subsequently locate any control within the UI provides the basis for automated test applications to operate on that UI. There are several Microsoft UI Automation properties used by clients and providers that assist in this.
![Automated Automated](https://pcquest.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/UI-Automator-for-Android-Test-Automation.jpg)
AutomationID
Uniquely identifies an automation element from its siblings. AutomationIdProperty is not localized, unlike a property such as NameProperty that is typically localized if a product gets shipped in multiple languages. See Use the AutomationID Property.
Note
AutomationIdProperty does not guarantee a unique identity throughout the automation tree. For example, an application may contain a menu control with multiple top-level menu items that, in turn, have multiple child menu items. These secondary menu items may be identified by a generic scheme such as 'Item1, Item 2, Item3, etc.', allowing duplicate identifiers for children across top-level menu items.
ControlType
Identifies the type of control represented by an automation element. Significant information can be inferred from knowledge of the control type. See UI Automation Control Types Overview.
NameProperty
This is a text string that identifies or explains a control. NameProperty should be used with caution since it can be localized. See UI Automation Properties Overview.
Implementing UI Automation in a Test Application
Add the UI Automation References. | The UI Automation dll's necessary for UI Automation clients are listed here. - UIAutomationClient.dll provides access to the UI Automation client-side APIs. - UIAutomationClientSideProvider.dll provides the ability to automate Win32 controls. See UI Automation Support for Standard Controls. - UIAutomationTypes.dll provides access to the specific types defined in UI Automation. |
Add the System.Windows.Automation namespace. | This namespace contains everything UI Automation clients need to use the capabilities of UI Automation except text handling. |
Add the System.Windows.Automation.Text namespace. | This namespace contains everything a UI Automation clients need to use the capabilities of UI Automation text handling. |
Find controls of interest | Automated test scripts locate UI Automation elements that represent controls of interest within the automation tree. There are multiple ways to obtain UI Automation elements with code. - Query the UI using a Condition statement. This is typically where the language-neutral AutomationIdProperty is used. Note: An AutomationIdProperty can be obtained using a tool such as Inspect.exe that is able to itemize the UI Automation properties of a control. - Use the TreeWalker class to traverse the entire UI Automation tree or a subset thereof. - Track focus. - Use the hWnd of the control. - Use screen location, such as the location of the mouse cursor. See Obtaining UI Automation Elements |
Obtain Control Patterns | Control patterns expose common behaviors for functionally similar controls. After locating the controls that require testing, automated test scripts obtain the control patterns of interest from those UI Automation elements. For example, the InvokePattern control pattern for typical button functionality or the WindowPattern control pattern for window functionality. See UI Automation Control Patterns Overview. |
Automate the UI | Automated test scripts can now control any UI of interest from a UI framework using the information and functionality exposed by the UI Automation control patterns. |
Related Tools and Technologies
There are a number of related tools and technologies that support automated testing with UI Automation.
Free Automated Ui Testing Tools
Inspect.exe is a graphical user interface (GUI) application that can be used to gather UI Automation information for both provider and client development and debugging. Inspect.exe is included in the Windows Software Development Kit (SDK).
MSAABridge exposes UI Automation information to Active Accessibility clients. The primary goal of bridging UI Automation to Active Accessibility is to allow existing Active Accessibility clients the ability to interact with any framework that has implemented UI Automation.
Security
For security information, see UI Automation Security Overview.
See also
Web Ui Testing
GUI testing tools serve the purpose of automating the testing process of software with graphical user interfaces.
Name | Supported platforms (testing system) | Supported platforms (tested system) | Developer | License | Automation | Latest version | Reference | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AscentialTest | Windows | Windows, Web | Zeenyx Software, Inc. | Proprietary | Yes | 9.0.1 | [1] | Active |
AutoIt | Windows | Windows | AutoIt | Proprietary | Yes | 3.3.14.0 | [2] | Active |
Appium | Windows, Linux, Mac (Python, C#, Ruby, Java, Javascript, PHP, Robot Framework) | iOS, Android (both native App & browser hosted app) | SauceLabs | Apache | Yes | (Binding Specific) | [3] | Active |
Dojo Objective Harness | cross-platform | Web | Dojo Foundation | AFL | Yes | 1.11.1 | [4] | Active |
eggPlant Functional | Windows, Linux, OS X | Windows, Linux, OS X, iOS, Android, Blackberry, Win Embedded, Win CE | TestPlant Ltd | Proprietary | Yes | Unknown | [citation needed] | Active |
HP WinRunner | Windows | Windows | Hewlett-Packard | Proprietary | Unknown | Unknown | [citation needed] | Discontinued |
IcuTest | Unknown | WPF | NXS-7 Software Inc | Proprietary | Unknown | Unknown | [citation needed] | Discontinued |
iMacros | Web (cross-browser) | Unknown | iOpus | Proprietary | Yes | 10.0.2 | [citation needed] | |
Katalon Studio | Windows, Linux, OS X | Web (UI & API), Mobile apps | Katalon LLC | Proprietary | Yes | 5.4.1 | [5] | Active |
Linux Desktop Testing Project | Linux (With Windows and OSX ports) | GUI applications with accessibility APIs | (Collaborative project) | GNU LGPL | Yes | 3.5.0 | [6] | |
Maveryx | Windows, Linux, OS X (only Java technologies) | Java, Swing, SWT, AWT, RCP, JavaFx, VB, MFC, .NET, WPF, HTML5 (cross-browser), | Maveryx Srl | Proprietary | Yes | 2.0.0 | [7] | Active |
Oracle Application Testing Suite | Windows | Web, Oracle Technology Products | Oracle | Proprietary | Yes | 12.5 | [8][9] | Active |
QF-Test | Windows, Linux, OS X, Web (cross-browser) | Java/Swing/SWT/Eclipse, JavaFX, Web applications | Quality First Software GmbH | Proprietary | Yes | 4.1.0 | [10] | Active |
Ranorex Studio | Windows | Windows, Web, iOS, Android | Ranorex GmbH | Proprietary | Yes | 8.3 | [11] | Active |
Rational Functional Tester | Windows, Linux | Windows, Swing, .NET, HTML | IBM Rational | Proprietary | Yes | 8.6.0.7 | [12] | Active |
Robot Framework | Web (cross-browser) | Web | (Collaborative project) | Apache | Yes | 3.0 | [13] | Active |
Sahi | Web (cross-browser), Windows | Web, Java, Java Web Start, Applet, Flex | Tyto Software[14] | Apache and Proprietary | Yes | 5.1 (open source), 7.0.1 | [15][16] | Active |
Selenium | Web (cross-browser) | Web | (Collaborative project) | Apache | Yes | 3.0 | [17] | Active |
SilkTest | Windows | Windows, Web | Micro Focus previously Borland and Segue | Proprietary | Yes | 17.5 | [18] | |
SOAtest | Windows, Linux, (cross-browser) | Web (cross-browser) | Parasoft | Proprietary | Yes | 9.10.3 | [19] | Active |
Squish GUI Tester | Windows, Linux, macOS, Solaris, AIX, QNX, WinCE, Windows Embedded, embedded Linux, Android, iOS | Qt, QML, QtQuick, Java AWT, Swing, SWT, RCP, JavaFx, Win32, MFC, WinForms, WPF, HTML5 (cross-browser), macOS Cocoa, iOS, Android, Tk | froglogic GmbH | Proprietary | Yes | 6.4 | [20] | Active |
Test Studio | Windows | Windows, Test Studio, Android, iOS | Telerik by Progress | Proprietary | Yes | 2017 R2 | [citation needed] | Active |
TestComplete | Windows | Windows, Android, iOS, Web | SmartBear Software | Proprietary | Yes | 12.20 | [citation needed] | Active |
Testing Anywhere | Unknown | Unknown | Automation Anywhere | Proprietary | Yes | 8.0 | [citation needed] | Discontinued |
TestPartner | Windows | Windows | Micro Focus | Proprietary | Yes | 6.3.1 | [citation needed] | Discontinued |
Tricentis Tosca | Windows | Windows, iOS, Android, Web, Cross-Browser, Java AWT, Java SWT, API, Win32, WinForms, WPF, Siebel, Delphi, PowerBuilder, up to around 40 different technologies | Tricentis | Proprietary | Yes | 12.0 | [21] | Active |
Twist | Unknown | Unknown | ThoughtWorks | Proprietary | Unknown | Unknown | [citation needed] | Discontinued |
Unified Functional Testing (UFT) previously named HP QuickTest Professional (QTP) | Windows | Windows, Web, Mobile, Terminal Emulators, SAP, Siebel, Java, .NET, Flex, others..[22] | Hewlett-Packard Enterprise | Proprietary | Yes | 14.00 | [23] | Active |
Visual Studio Coded UI Test | Windows | Windows, Web | Microsoft | Proprietary | Yes | 12.0 | Unknown | Inactive[24] |
Watir | Web | Web (cross-browser) | (Collaborative project) | BSD | Yes | 3.0 | [citation needed] | |
Xnee | UNIX | X Window | GNU Project, Henrik Sandklef | GNU GPL | Unknown | Unknown | [citation needed] |
References[edit]
- ^'Jolt Awards 2014: The Best Testing Tools'. Dr.Dobbs.com. June 3, 2014. Retrieved 2016-09-27.
- ^'AutoIt'. autolt. June 3, 2014. Retrieved 2016-09-27.
- ^'Mobile Phone automation'. appium. Retrieved 2018-12-11.
- ^'Dojo Toolkit'. DOJO. Retrieved 2016-09-27.
- ^Brian (2017-10-26). 'Best Automation Testing Tools for 2018 (Top 10 reviews)'. Medium. Retrieved 2018-05-22.
- ^'Linux Desktop Testing Project'. LDTP Website. Retrieved 2015-07-26.
- ^'Maveryx'. maveryx. Retrieved 2018-08-27.
- ^'Oracle - Oracle Application Testing Suite'. Retrieved 2016-11-08.
- ^'OATS - Oracle Application Testing Suite - Testingtools.co'.
- ^'QF-Test Overview'. QFS Website. Retrieved 2014-10-09.
- ^'Ranorex Release Notes'. Ranorex Website. Retrieved 2015-11-18.
- ^'Functional Tester'. IBM Website. Retrieved 2016-03-08.
- ^'GUI Automation'. Sorted Inf. Retrieved 2014-02-22.
- ^'Sahi Open Source Vs. Sahi Pro'. Sahi Pro Website. Retrieved 2014-09-02.
- ^'Sahi — Web Automation and Test Tool'. Open-source Sahi on Sourceforge. Retrieved 2014-09-02.
- ^'Sahi — The tester's Web Automation Tool'. Sahi Pro Website. Retrieved 2014-09-02.
- ^'What is Selenium?'. Selenium HQ. Retrieved 2014-09-02.
- ^'Silk Test Overview'(PDF).
- ^'Parasoft Launches SOATest: Raising the Bar on API Integrity'. 2013-06-14. Retrieved 2018-10-16.
- ^'Squish GUI Tester'. froglogic Website. Retrieved 2017-12-07.
- ^'Tricentis Tosca'. Tricentis Tosca. Retrieved 2017-04-12.
- ^'More Add-ins'. uft-help.saas.hpe.com. Retrieved 2017-08-02.
- ^'What's New in UFT 14.00'. uft-help.saas.hpe.com. Retrieved 2017-08-02.
- ^'Changes to Coded UI Test in Visual Studio 2019'. Azure DevOps Blog. Retrieved 2019-04-15.