Then How would I access your code? After accessing my code, should I use it in WATIR library to check how is the performance? By the way where is your new code?
On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 8:22:53 PM UTC+5:30, Justin Ko wrote: > > Sorry, no, these changes are not available in 6.10.1. > > There are still changes I want to do for the simplify_locator branch. > However, if the current state solves your problem, I can see if I get > something merged in sooner. > > Justin > > > On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 1:42:05 AM UTC-5, > rajagopal...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> This change available in recent water 6.10.1? >> >> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 11:39:51 PM UTC+5:30, Justin Ko wrote: >>> >>> Rajagopalan, would you be able to see if the changes I have made in >>> https://github.com/jkotests/watir/tree/simplify_locator fixes the >>> performance problem for :visible_text? >>> >>> I think the problem is where we filter elements: >>> >>> def filter_elements_by_locator(elements, visible = nil, visible_text = >>> nil, idx = nil, tag_name: nil, filter: :first) >>> elements.select! { |el| visible == el.displayed? } unless visible.nil? >>> elements.select! { |el| visible_text === el.text } unless visible_text >>> .nil? >>> elements.select! { |el| element_validator.validate(el, {tag_name: >>> tag_name}) } unless tag_name.nil? >>> filter == :first ? elements[idx || 0] : elements >>> end >>> >>> >>> We apply the filter to every element found, even if you just want the >>> first one. The changes I have in progress switch this to be lazy - ie we >>> would only need to inspect the first link that matches. For a page with a >>> lot of links, I believe this would increase performance a lot. >>> >>> Justin >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 12:56:46 PM UTC-5, rajagopalan madasami >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I am using watir over selenium for two reasons, one reason is waiting >>>> timings are maintained by local language binding but selenium is >>>> maintaining timing from driver level , since selenium uses the timing from >>>> driver level it differs from Firefox to Chrome, but since WATIR is >>>> maintaining timing from local language binding it doesn't matter whether I >>>> use Chrome or Firefox. Another reason is stale element problem, WATIR >>>> relocates the element when element goes to stale other than that I don't >>>> use any other features of WATIR because everything else is time consuming >>>> like xpah formation. So if you simply allow element () to access selenium >>>> locators directly it would be useful for me rather than unnecessary >>>> deprecating what word extraordinary. >>>> >>>> On 12-Dec-2017 11:06 PM, "Titus Fortner" <titusf...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey Chuck, >>>>> >>>>> Especially with Watir 6, there are some good synchronization reasons >>>>> to prefer Watir over default selenium, even if not taking advantage of >>>>> the >>>>> improved encapsulation of the subclasses or the more advanced locator >>>>> strategies. Though, not so many that it might not be worth it for him to >>>>> roll his own at that point. Depends on how much else in the Watir >>>>> ecosystem >>>>> he is relying on. >>>>> >>>>> Titus >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 11:20:28 AM UTC-6, Chuck van der >>>>> Linden wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> bah... need to be able to edit... I confused using .link method of >>>>>> watir with the :link locator type of Selenium... please disregard the >>>>>> confusion over that sentence. >>>>>> >>>>>> Point being however that you seem wedded to directly using .element >>>>>> and selenium selection methods, so the question of why even use Watir as >>>>>> opposed to Selenium, given your preferences, still exists. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 9:17:10 AM UTC-8, Chuck van der >>>>>> Linden wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:29:52 PM UTC-8, >>>>>>> rajagopal...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can you please pay a little attention to the ongoing conversation? >>>>>>>> The conversation is not about using element() or using link() >>>>>>>> function, the >>>>>>>> conversation is about performance issue while I use visible text. I am >>>>>>>> ready to use visible text If it does the good performance but it's not >>>>>>>> doing it, I am trying to click a link which takes minutes to click >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> link but when I use link locator it clicks instantly. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You say that, yet every code example I see from you uses .element >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then we have statements like this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, I agree using b.link() increases the performance, But I >>>>>>>> completely against the idea of not using the link: locator of selenium. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (given the sentence makes no sense if parsed using the double >>>>>>> negative (in which case you would already be using .link, which you are >>>>>>> not), I presume that 'not' in the above is a typo) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So despite people telling you to use .link, you seem insistent on >>>>>>> using .element. which is basically the same as using raw Webdriver >>>>>>> instead >>>>>>> of Watir. So frankly I don't think my question is that out of line. >>>>>>> If >>>>>>> you insist on using .element, and are as you stated 'completely against >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> idea' of using the watir API, then why use Watir and not just use >>>>>>> webdriver >>>>>>> directly? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In terms of performance: >>>>>>> As Titus asked earlier, can you provide a code example that >>>>>>> demonstrates the performance difference you are claiming to see? not a >>>>>>> discussion of code, but actual code against an actual site. >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> -- >>>>> Before posting, please read http://watir.com/support. In short: >>>>> search before you ask, be nice. >>>>> >>>>> watir-...@googlegroups.com >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/watir-general >>>>> watir-genera...@googlegroups.com >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Watir General" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to watir-genera...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> -- -- Before posting, please read http://watir.com/support. In short: search before you ask, be nice. watir-general@googlegroups.com http://groups.google.com/group/watir-general watir-general+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Watir General" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to watir-general+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
