Jcolonio's avatar
Jcolonio
Occasional Contributor
4 years ago
Status:
New Idea

Allow OOP coding with full intellisense in Testcomplete

I understand that Testcomplete is a scripting language and some use the tool for automation script development with "record & playback", however, it would be much appreciated have the option of developing using a oop design patterns.

 

Python and JavaScript are powerful languages. By relegating them to a script code style is stripping away their best features. Those that use JavaScript and Python for automation are using them with selenium which does not have a great way to automate desktop applications. By allowing users to choose to develop oop code with the namemapping features, Testcomplete can work as the preferred IDE for automation. 

Data-Driven Testing
Desktop Testing
Keyword Tests
Mobile Testing
Name Mapping
web testing
  • avl123's avatar
    avl123
    New Contributor
    2 years ago

    This is my pain too and I am happy to see that I am not alone. There are a number of other ideas addressing missing functionality of TC Editor compared to any decent IDE. An ultimate solution as for me is to enable possibility to work in an external IDE unlocking all the power it can offer.

     

    I have ended up using VS Code + this tool here https://github.com/deitry/testcomplete-ts-api to develop in JavaScript. As long as I don't need debugging I just run TestExecute to execute the script from the command line within VS Code. I can also halfway use typescript to define types and apply typing with jsdoc syntax which TC treats as a comment I guess. It is so much more efficient to work in a proper IDE with all the additional tools you can install in it!

  • GGuezet's avatar
    GGuezet
    Contributor
    3 years ago

    I cannot agree more.

    We are working with python packages, one package for each of our products.

    As TC intellisense does not work with external packages, I am blindly calling functions & classes from my packages.

    This is becoming very frustrating and time consuming, as errors occurs more frequently.

    If nothing can be done (This feature is requested since 2012...), we will probably switch for another solution than TestComplete