Improved Keyword Test correction when renaming Aliases
Hello! Whenever an alias is changed in a project's NameMapping file, TestComplete will offer to automatically correct any items in Keyword Tests that use the alias. However, I have found that this feature only works with Test Actions (On-Screen Action, If Object, etc.) and Checkpoints (Property Checkpoint, Region Checkpoint, etc.) Currently, Logging items (Log, Post Screenshot, etc.) and Statements (While Loop, If... Then, Set Variable Value, etc.) do not get updated automatically with this feature. Having this functionality would help greatly reduce errors that result from partial renaming jobs.
Differentiate between a runtime error and a checkpoint error
Given this ability to determine test complete behavior on error: I would like to differentiate a runtime error as with an error in test creation and a test failure or checkpoint error. Something similar to many unit test frameworks assert fail so that I can have different playback behavior and a failure specific eventQuestion of The Day
Not many questions from me lately ......and who would have thought I would become somewhat proficient at Python and Data Mapping Taking a second to say thanks to those who have helped. We are all learners. Now does any body have a script that will write my daily status report. Have a great Holiday weekendAuto Generate PDF Report
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!
Number of Checkpoint required in Log Summary and log Object
I have noticed that sometime test complete script fails to execute complete scripts and log the results with Zero Warnings and Errors reason could be any but result is incomplete execution of script. When we generate and send email through log object we only gets number of Errors and Warnings which are misleading results or numbers. When we go to the details we find that scripts execution is incomplete. I request you to add number of checkpoints validated by scripts in Log summary (I have highlighted the place to show in attached snapshot). Even if number of Errors and Warnings would be Zero and if we don't get the desired number of checkpoints which could also be zero, we can easily identify that scripts fail to complete their execution.
Add Unity/Game Engine extension to TestComplete
https://support.smartbear.com/testcomplete/docs/app-testing/open-apps/index.html According to a support link above from SmartBear, the language (Unity/Game Engine) we used to develop our product (code name 15Tango) is NOT the on the list, therefore, our product is not an open app to TestComplete. TC15 can’t display the objects underneath our product, so we could not add “Checkpoints” on the objects from the product UI to validate testing requirements. Could SmartBear add Unity extension to TestComplete so it could test our product like it tests a product written in .Net easily? Unity/Game Engine based product market is rapidly growing. The engine can be used to createthree-dimensional(3D) andtwo-dimensional(2D) games, as well as interactivesimulations.The engine has been adopted by industries outside video gaming, such asfilm,automotive,architecture,engineering,construction, and theUnited States Armed Forces. A Unity extension to TC will benefit both SmartBear and our product for now and future.
Github Copilot Integration
GitHub Copilot suggests code completions as developers type and turns natural language prompts into coding suggestions based on the project's context and style conventions. One new idea would be having a copilot plugin for testcomplete would increase productivity and coding efficiency URL for reference - https://github.com/features/copilotBest way to execute an action if a control is visible?
First sorry if this question was already asked but i have created a shared keyword test to try and perform an action only if a control is visible: Initially in my condition i had only the Control.Visible check but was throwing an error since the control did not exist for that case. This is when i added the Control.Exists first check. What bothers me is that this check make my test much slower when the control in question isnot available. For example when this control does exist, it would take 10sec to execute my test. But if it is not available, my test would then take 20-25sec to perform the same thing. Therefore i was wondering if i was doing the right way or if there was a better way that would speed up the check? Thanks!
