TestComplete plugin on VS Code
I like Testcomplete and all it's features, however, when needing to write code it is a bit of a pain (intellisense, styling, code completion, indenting, etc., all do not work well). Instead of coding in Testcomplete, can we add support in VS Code for development and execution? Still have it tied to the license and no need for namemapping, at least not right away, so we can take advantage of a smoother ide. I currently use python with TestComplete.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.
Implementation of OnWebPageDownloaded event for Chrome & Edge browser
As part of the Event Handlers, we have lot of events in TestComplete which are easy to implement in Project and helps to reduce manual effort. There is one Event called 'OnWebPageDownloaded' which occurs post the web browser loads a page specified by URL. However, this event is supported to IE browser and MS Web Browser control only. This event is not supported to Chrome & Edge browser as both are mode from Chromium engine. Please implement this event for other browsers like Chrome, Edge & Firefox browser as a future purpose.. That will helps to implement same event across all the browsers.TestComplete Framework
For those of you who attended the SmartBear Academy 301 on October 18th, I've made a couple of relatively minor changes to the framework I presented and the script extensions I created for them. If you are interested, you can download the framework code, the extensions, and the samples at https://bitbucket.org/tristaanogre/tabledrivenframework/downloads. Please feel free to message me any questions or such on this. Again, this is a Creative Commons licensed thingie so feel free to use it under the license terms.
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/copilotMake it possible for 'Execution Plan Editor' to work with 'tags'
Hi, The request is to have the 'Execution Plan Editor' to work with Automation tests that has 'tags' on them. Currently if the "Run @tag" option is selected, the tests will run in no apparent order, ie. the 'Execution Plan Editor' feature does not work along with it. Hope that the feature request can have some priority, since it would definitely help a lot of Projects that utilize the Automation tests to run on CI/CD Pipeline. Thank you in advance.
Log Folder Items, Set the Icon while inside the stack (or auto detect on some hiearchy)
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(); }Run A KeywordTest by name
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).
