Navigation: home >about>guicomparison
Introducing TextTest and Acceptance Testing
Comparing tools for acceptance testing of rich-client GUIs

Test Language Type
Domain Language
Domain Language
Domain Language
Tool-defined (“ActionFixture”)
Programming Language(Python)
Test Persistence Format
plain text 'usecase', plain text logs
plain text script
script embedded in table
script embedded in table
Python script
Support for driving tests via the UI
Yes
Yes – though not in domain language
No
No
Yes
Can record tests using the UI
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Assertion mechanism
hand-assertion calling test API
hand-assertion calling test API
hand-assertion calling test API
hand-assertion doing widget state checks
Code changes required to get started
calls to StoryText, logging of relevant behaviour
creation of a test API
creation of a test API
creation of a test API
None (though naming all GUI components generally necessary)
Support for refactoring of test scripts
Domain language composite files (cannot pass arguments)
Domain language composite files (can pass arguments)
None at customer level – though can always refine domain language
None
Programming language : can be refactored in any way
Languages/toolkits supported
Java and .NET
Java
Java, .NET, Python, Perl, Smalltalk, C++
Java (Swing only)
Support for multithread synchronisation
Hand-insertion of generic wait statements (not domain language)
No direct support
No direct support
Hand-insertion of wait statements for widget state changes
Integration with other tools
Parallel testing on grid (SGE or LSF), Bug-reporting (Bugzilla)
Continous integration (CruiseControl)
Wiki (using FitNesse)
Wiki (using FitNesse)
None


Last updated: 05 October 2012