Testcomplete has only 2 tabs:

Object Browser

Project Workspace

Can we add a new tab for Project Logs tab?

I often switch back between logs results and Workspace when debugging my testscripts.

if I have a long list of logs, navigating back to a keyword test and to the bottom of the last log in the project explorer is slow.

New project log tab.png ‏57 KB

It would be useful to be able to pass a code expression as a parameter to keyword tests. I have the need to pass dates to a keyword tests (object type is fine) but have no ability to specify a code expression as the parameter (second image). As an example I would like to pass four weeks from today as the EndDate: aqDateTime.AddDays(aqDateTime.Today(), 28)

This sort of code is unmaintainable: 

See my posting here

Currently you have to use another separate persistent variable (on project level) to auto iterate through a data table with just 1 row, each test run.

It would be an enhancement if this feature be implemented more efficient (for example with a tick box "keep track on last used row and pick next row" (or something similar) in the Row/Column selection screen.

I hope it is clear what I mean.

Regards,

Mathijs

EDIT: Additional note, also implement this for reading data out of Excel files (the solution I described here DOES NOT work if you read data out of Excel)

2016-03-02_13-19-19.png ‏268 KB

So we've got a login test the has parameters (started with just UserName and Password). As we add new parameters to the test we have to go find every place that the login test was called and double click the line that calls said test and wait for TestComplete to inform us that the amount of parameters is different, do you want to update?

Of course we want to update! We can't run the test without errors until we update. Even if the new parameter is optional, TestComplete still errors out when calling the test without the new parameter.

I'm even OK if you have to prompt me and make me wait while you traverse through the whole project to find the calls to that updated test. It's still a heck of a lot better than me waiting for the tests to fail (because the errors only happen when the test is called during replay, not during compilation prior to the test run).

I would like to see TestComplete releases in 64 bit mode. Since more and more applications are becoming 64bit and (Virtual, Cloud) Operating Systems as well. Also OS'es are moving toward 64-bit. And with access to more memory, more scalability etc, I propose to release TestComplete in a native 64-bit variant.

While also keep releasing 32bit versions as well.

Hi,

We are using webform+ as a platform to develop a different type of scripts. So we are looking for SmartBear Test Complete to support this platform.

Thanks,

msqe-ops

We would need to perform cross browser testing. Our application support has for IE, Firefox, Chrome and Safari. We are using Testcomplete for our automation. The main reason for using test complete tool for us is its support for all those browsers. But from 10.4 version the Safari support was removed. Due to this we are unable to run our automation script for Safari which incompletes our test coverage for cross browsers.

It would be great if you could support Safari browser. or else we have to forcefully move to a different tool which gives support for Safari.

Regards

Prasad

Code templates work well, if You use them paragraph-wise.

But- if the template just contains some text to be added (e.g. some frequently used parameters for a function call) to the word You just typed? In this case the word is gone. This is annoying and shall be stopped.

SmartBear customer care tells me, the developers treat this as "planned and expected behavior". I do not understand this.

I'm not entirely expecting this one to go very far... but...

The architecture of the automated framework that I'm currently building has the majority of the code to be executed "hidden" in Script extensions. This makes it so that I can implement the framework in any project without having to worry about including a lot of code units.

HOWEVER... the framework still needs to have at least one method called from a Keyword operation or a Script code unit in order to fire off the test run... 

I would LOVE to be able to create a Test Item in Project -> Test Items that I can link the test item DIRECTLY to such a method without having to create the trivial code unit or keyword test.  Would make script extensions as an architecture framework that much more cooler...

situation:
first keywordtest has name 1;
second keywordtest has name 2;

keywordtest 2 calls keywordtest 1 (by using Run Keyword test command);

User deletes keywordtest 1 from projectexplorer.

Would be better if warning is displayed that keywordtest 1 is being used by keywordtest 2. And deleting test 1 would result in exception if keywordtest 2 is executed.

When you click on the error message cell in the above table, it navigates back to the keyword/script line.

It would be nice if you can click on the object name in the screen shot and navigate back to the Object Browser

The existing default behaviour of the MSSCCI Perforce integration is very limiting, which requires multiple users to share the same Perforce Workspace.

It would be noce to be able to either:

1. Run a distributed test on BrowserStack.
2. Be able to recognise BrowserStack RDP session objects when it runs in a browser.

For initialisations and tear-down which applies to all test casses (e.g. server connection) it would be nice to have event handlers like OnStartTest /OnStopTest but at project and suite level.

TC is definitely not able to handle dynamically changed Project properties correctly in shared Project mode / multi-user mode.

I tried it with TC and TE running parallel, both dynamically changing the ODT tree: dynamical properties are changed by a first running TC/TE instance. When a second instance starts, it gets the properties in changed Status and changes them again. In case a third instance would start, it would get properties changed over and over. The property values You get depend on the call starting sequence of the instances and on their running time.

Using the silent mode of TE stores the changes without a Chance to Abort this.

At least, the second instance fortunately doesn't make the first instance's property readings inconsistent.

Similar things can be watched with the  TestedApplications Object.

It seems as if TC/TE gets a local snapshot of the central Project properties when starting a test run. When the test is finished, or in case of ODT even during the test run, changes are written back to the central Project store.

The correct way to handle this would be to

- get a local snapshot of the Project properties

- store any changes EXCLUSIVELY in this local snapshot

- enable the script programmer/user to save or disregard when the test run is over.

See also: https://community.smartbear.com/t5/TestComplete-General-Discussions/using-TC-properties-dynamically/...