On 2010-08-11, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> In message <i3t449$7c...@reader1.panix.com>, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>> Automated GUI intended to uncover problems in the underlying program
>> functionality ...
>
> That ???underlying??? functionality has nothing to do with the GUI,
> then. Why not test it directly, rather than go through the GUI?
Because in many programs _there_is_no_other_way_to_test_it_directly_.
Yes, that sucks. In the real world most programs suck. You've still
got to test them.
>> Automated GUI testing often isn't even being used to test the program
>> whos GUI is being automated. It's often used to test _other_ programs
>> with which the GUI-automated-program interacts.
>
> Again, this sounds like it has nothing to do with the GUI per se.
Exactly! That's what we've been trying to explain. Automating a GUI
isn't done to test how well the GUI works for real users. It's done
mainly for two purposes:
1) Regression testing to make sure that the GUI's behavior (good,
bad, or indifferent) hasn't changed since the previous revision.
2) To test the functionality underlying the GUI.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
