TestComplete Feature Requests

In large TestComplete project, it would be extremely handy to be able to Collapse/Expand (All and Group) in KeywordTests script. Same as implemented in Project Explorer, NameMapping, Script Editor, and Logs. ... View more

- select some Keyword Tests - right click - choose "Run selected Tests"   ... View more

It would be very useful to have a feature where the test logs can be automatically generated to PDF files.   Essentially, rather than manually generate a PDF report as an export as instructed in Test Complete documentation: https://support.smartbear.com/testcomplete/docs/testing-with/log/working-with/exporting/index.html#pdf have the PDF report generate with a simple "writeLogToPDF" command.   Thanks for your consideration!   ... View more

Edit:  Added a specific Use Case for clarity   Like most users I use parameters for my KWTs.  Some parameters have a limited option pool e.g. paramater "WantACookie" can have 3 and only 3 values "Yes", "No" and "Not Sure"  This parameter is used to set the text of a combobox.  I could create it as a string that correlates with this and each other KWT or script that calls this KWT just needs to send the string.  Say, however the the marketing department decided that "Not Sure" is no longer broadcasting the right message and want to change it to "I'm Thinking About It"  All those other scripts and KWTs that used to set it to "Not Sure" will break.  Is it possible to create the parameter as a list of key->value pairs.  That way my other KWTs and scripts can say the vaule should be WantACookie.NotSure and all I have to do is go to my KWTs WantACookie paramter and change the value of the "NotSure" key to "I'm thinking About It"  You would probably have to define this KVP list in the parameter type itself I guess and when setting properties in the visual editor, this "Enum" should be available the same way Variables and Parameters are from a dropdown.   A specific Use Case:   The Enum is a way to define a limited amount of set options that you know won't change Say I'm an e-commerce site.  I wan't to make sure users don't have a bad experience by accidentally buying something when they intended to just add it to the wish list.  Three tests:   1. Textbox1.Keys()->Textbox2.Keys(),texbox3.Keys,etc,-> buttonPlaceOrder.Click() -> Open Wishlist page -> Are ther items ? No -> Pass -> Open Basket -> Are there items? Yes ->Pass   2. Textbox1.Keys()->Textbox2.Keys(),texbox3.Keys,etc,-> buttonAddWishList.Click() -> Open Wishlist page -> Are ther items ? Yes -> Pass -> Open Basket -> Are there items? No ->Pass   3. Textbox1.Keys()->Textbox2.Keys(),texbox3.Keys,etc,-> buttonCance.Click()l -> Open Wishlist page -> Are ther items ? No -> Pass -> Open Basket -> Are there items? No ->Pass   All three tests have the data populate in common.  I don't really care what data is in there and I won't use it in a Data Loop so it can all be the same and be written into a single test so I don't have to duplicate all those .Keys() and .Clicks() into all my KWTs So, create one KWT PopulateOrder that does the keypresses. One step further I can see the only thing that distinguishes the process is what button gets clicked.  If I specify this as a parameter like PopulateOrder(OrderAction) I can change my tests to this by simply dragging the new KWT into my visualiser :   1. PopulateOrder(Order) -> Open Wishlist page -> Are ther items ? No -> Pass -> Open Basket -> Are there items? Yes ->Pass   2. PopulateOrder(WishList) -> Open Wishlist page -> Are ther items ? Yes -> Pass -> Open Basket -> Are there items? No ->Pass   3. PopulateOrder(Cancel)->Open Wishlist page -> Are ther items ? No -> Pass -> Open Basket -> Are there items? No ->Pass   The last steps in  my Populate order is an if statement:    If(OrderAction equals "Order"){buttonPlaceOrder.Click()}   If(OrderAction equals "WishList"){buttonAddWishList.Click()}   If(OrderAction equals "Cancel"){buttonCancel.Click()}   If I drag the KWT into another KWT I can supply this parameter.  Problem is, if a user doesn't know the exact string required and they type in, say "PlaceOrder", the KWT will fail because none of the if statements match.  If on the other hand I can define the parameter as an enum that the user can choose from a dropdown I know the logic will always work e.g.   if(OrderAction equuals OrderActionEnum.Order) {buttonPlaceOrder.Click()}   It's something I would really have appreciated when I started using TC.   It would have helped standardise my tests by always having the option based parameters defined, thereby avoiding loads of rework due to early inexperience. It still helps because I wouldn't have to open the PopulateOrder just to double check what string I need to send. ... View more

Hi,   I regularly manage to have enough KWTs, scripts and project tabs open to make the tabs run into a second row.  I find though that at any given time there's only 2 or 3 I use intensively at a time.  For example, I have a test keywordtest for experimenting with new scripts.  Each time I open a script to debug or step through that tab gets pushed out until it ends up on the second row of tabs and I have to search for it again - repeatedly.  What would be awesome is if we could say, decide three tabs are used very intensively at the moment and are important to have them within easy reach, please always keep them leftmost in the tabs.  I know there is right click=>default docking in Workspace, which appens to move it to the top if it's already tabbed, but as soon as I decide some other tab is more important, default docking in Workspace kicks all the tabs all over the show again and I have to redo the docking.  Just a plain "Pin" and it always stays there and "Unpin" and it can go where it wants again would suffice.   Regards,   ... View more

its not possible to select multiple keyword-tests (from the project tree) and drag them into an opened keyword-test (workspace). might be a helpful feature ... ... View more

everytime you open a keywordtest the project tree jumps to its location. if you have many many items in your tree it can be really annoying because you have to scroll and scroll. would be nice to have an option to disable the automatic behavior and use manual expansion (if needed). ... View more

If you're running a keyword test via script, especially in a data driven environment where the data dictates which test to execute, it would be useful to be able to get a count of the parameters on a keyword test.  Currently, for any keyword test, you have access to the Parameters object for the test and then just each parameter individually.  There is not a way to iterate through those parameters and assign values prior to execution nor is there a way to simply get a count of the parameters so you can build your parameter list to pass to the Run method.   It would be nice if, on a per test basis, you have access to something like KeywordTests.MyTest.Parameters.Count and even some way of iterating through the collection to set the values prior to test execution... something like going through all the parameters, setting the values, and then just executing "Run"...    The idea behind this, again, is to make implementing keyword tests in a data driven framework easier. With the above changes, you can add parameter values to a keyword test in a more generic way.  A framework developer could then (if the KeywordTest by name feature gets implemented), find a keyword test simply by name, assign parameter values to the keyword test straight from data without foreknowledge of the test ahead of time, and execute the keyword test.  A much more generic and dynamic automation framework could be created then to integrate keyword tests more fully into a data driven structure. ... View more

Runner.CallMethod works pretty well with regards to running Keyword tests.  You can do a syntax like:   Runner.CallMethod('KeywordTests.TestName.Run', 'parametervalue'); However, this is a bit clunky to me. First of all, if you don't have the name up front but want to parameterize this call, you would need to do a concatenated string for the object name. Secondly, this just seems to be a bit out of the way.  Code Completion already knows all the tests associated with the KeywordTests object so the information is already there.   It would be nice to do something like   KeywordTests.TestByName('MyTest').Run('parametervalue'); This just seems more intuitive and lends itself to a much cleaner implementation for creating a framework around the tests.   Note that I'd prefer the keyword test to be returned by name so that we have access to things like Test.Variables and Test.Parameters (see my other ideas on KeywordTests). ... View more

One of the beauties of Script Extension Runtime Objects is that you can create code that is shared across ALL projects without having to include the code units in the projects themselves.  I am involved in the process of creating a detailed test automation framework where a good bit of the framework code is encapsulated in script extension runtime objects.   However, one of the drawbacks I've run into is that, if the framework needs to execute a Keyword test instead of simply a Script routine, the code cannot reside in the extension. Currently, Script Extensions do not support the KeywordTests object and all the methods and objects underneath.   It would be nice to be able to execute KeywordTests within script extensions so I'm formally requesting the ability to do so. ... View more

it is not possible to work with multiple keywordtest-logs at the workspace. if you have one opened and opens another one, the first opened one will disappear. ... View more

It would useful to be able to define clean-up steps/post-conditions for keyword tests. This could be implemented as a new test step section at the bottom that always gets called regardless of whether the main test failed or not. The test would still be reported as having failed in the test results, but before moving onto the next test it calls the clean up steps.   I know that you could implement this as a separate test that gets called after the main test in the test project, but that's a pain if multiple tests have the same clean-up steps. Having explicit clean-up steps makes it easier to understand what the test does just by looking at it, and how it might affect the rest system and subsequent tests if it fails early.   I tried using the Try ... Finally keyword test steps but the Finally step isn't called when an error-level message is logged. Maybe we need to be able to raise exceptions from keyword tests instead of using Log Error Message, so the Finally step is still called. ... View more

I thought this should just be a feature already and I posted asking for help to get it to work.   https://community.smartbear.com/t5/TestComplete-General-Discussions/Log-Folder-Icon-Checkpoint-Over-Message-Javascript/m-p/200736#M37434   The log folders are real nice for cleaning up the logs but they only change Icon's if the Folder contains an Error or a Warning.    I want LogFolders to show a green if it contains a checkpoint.  A common sense order of importance Error > Warning > Checkpoint > Message.   Instead it's showing Error > Warning > Message.   I think it should even auto detect based on the Log item's priority that has been set.   Or just a method to hit  ie,  Log.CurrentStack(iconWarning, priorityHigh);     function TestScriptLog() { Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be an Error"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder","",pmNormal); Log.Checkpoint("Checkpoint in Folder","",pmNormal); Log.Warning("Warning in Folder","",pmNormal); Log.Error("Error in Folder","",pmHighest); Log.PopLogFolder(); Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be an Error"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder"); Log.Checkpoint("Checkpoint in Folder"); Log.Warning("Warning in Folder"); Log.Error("Error in Folder"); Log.PopLogFolder(); Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be a Warning"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder","",pmNormal); Log.Checkpoint("Checkpoint in Folder","",pmNormal); Log.Warning("Warning in Folder","",pmHighest); Log.PopLogFolder(); Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be a Warning"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder"); Log.Checkpoint("Checkpoint in Folder"); Log.Warning("Warning in Folder"); Log.PopLogFolder(); Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be a Checkpoint"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder","",pmNormal); Log.Checkpoint("Checkpoint in Folder","",pmHighest); Log.PopLogFolder(); Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be a Checkpoint"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder"); Log.Checkpoint("Checkpoint in Folder"); Log.PopLogFolder(); Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be an Informational"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder","",pmHighest); Log.PopLogFolder(); Log.AppendFolder("This folder Icon should be an Informational"); Log.Message("Informational in Folder"); Log.PopLogFolder(); }   ... View more

Currently, test case value is visible from UI part, but the same identification from the script would be great. For example, it is available to get Enabled, Description, Timeout, etc https://support.smartbear.com/testcomplete/docs/reference/project-objects/project-suite/testitem/properties.html   So, I want to request feature to get value using script if test item is marked as "test case" or not   About test case column from UI part https://support.smartbear.com/testcomplete/docs/working-with/managing-projects/test-items.html   Thanks, Kristina ... View more

If this feature is available, I do not know how to do it.  It would very helpful to be able to enter multi-line text content into the Description column of the keyword test editor.  Our convention for documentation is to write something meaningful to a human operator of the software application being tested for each step such that a manual test can be performed to mimmick the keyword test.  The problem is, there is no wrap-around on this column, nor is there an ability to enter a carriage return directly into the editor.  We have a workaround, which is to write the text into Notepad (with carriage returns) and cut and paste from Notepad into the Description cell.  This is very cumbersome at best.   As far as I can tell, the Description column appears to be the place to do line-by-line comments (we prefer to use the Comment line in keyword tests for higher-level documentation).  We like the line-by-line commenting because we have a in-house program that will pull out the Description content from keyword tests and write them to a text file, thus giving us a manual test procedure for a diagnostician to run when we encounter bugs. ... View more

Hi, I read that there was a feature request about 2 years ago suggesting that when we add a new parameter to a keyword test updates all references to that keyword test to at least pass the default value of the parameter.   Is there a reason this feature is not being developed? We have a suite thats almost three years old and the more functionalities our application has the more we add optional parameters or make a separate keyword test to handle those new functionalities.   Making a separate keyword test still requires us to look for all references to the original keyword test and add the new complement keyword test.   Testcomplete does allow us to update all references to objects such as namemapping aliases so I'm just curious why this hasnt been done yet ... View more

if you create a folder in keywordtestlist it will be automatically named "New Folder 1, New Folder 2, ..." and you have to rightclick, choose rename to name it as you want - pls enhance the creation to normal behavior (like windows):  - create folder - default name is highlighted but not set - you can type new name (without reselecting!) ... View more

if you have a large list of networksuite jobs its very annoying to scroll trough the whole list of tests manually - it would be nice to have a selection window like it exists for the project suite test items. ... View more

We develop WPF applications for Desktop with touch screen. TC provides only mouse events of controls. Touch events and mouse events are entirely different beasts. They are not interchangeable. Testing of drag, flick, pinch, press+drag, rotate... (multi touch) are not possible to test with TestComplete. But this is neccessary. ... View more