Yes, we very much need to be able to test against various browsers (both old - IE8 comes to mind - and new). Any solution that doesn't allow automated testing against multiple browsers on multiple platforms seems a less optimal choice. The various JS, CSS and maybe SVG implementations just differ too much.
I like the (M)XML option to define the test, as it will allow one test to be run against both outputs (SWF and release JS). So Mustella seems the logical choice for the SWF side, and for the browser side we can just take the (M)XML, parse it into something else and feed that to an established JS/HTML testing environment, like Selenium. This is what Marmottini was supposed to do, eventually. In it's current state, Marmottini is just a proof of concept, where the test is hard coded into Java. But, especially with the help of the Mustella Java code that I presume parses the MXML, it shouldn't be too hard to read in MXML, translate the input into Selenium tests and run those... Another option might be to use Mustella and add a code path that uses Selenium instead of the Flash Player to test JS and feed the output of that back into the Mustella reporting stuff. EdB On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Sean Thayne <s...@skyseek.com> wrote: > If you ran the JS tests inside of an air app, you could generate bitmaps > for comparison.. But, that wouldn't really work to test different browsers, > which is another thing FlexJS will probably need. To test everything in all > major browsers. > > -Sean Thayne > > > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:26 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala > <bigosma...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > Doesn't Mustella need bitmap comparison? That would be almost impossible > > to get to work in HTML. Selenium probably is a better option for these > > kind of things. > > > > Another option is that perhaps we could build a runner in AIR that loads > > the html stuff in a HTML component. That we could reuse the bitmap > > comparison part as well. That would test only Webkit rendering, but that > > could be a good baseline. > > > > I was thinking of something like this for when we need to start testing > the > > FXG/SVG skins. > > > > Thanks, > > Om > > On Mar 11, 2014 9:57 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > I just checked in enough code to get the Button and CheckBox test from > > the > > > SDK's checkintest to run under FlexJS. There's another half-dozen or > so > > > tests we should probably finish converting since we have those > components > > > in the FlexJS framework. Getting some sort of checkintest running is > one > > > of the last things I want to do before cutting an an initial official > > > FlexJS release. > > > > > > This checkintest works like the SDK test. It compiles a SWF and runs > it > > > and examines the output. The next step is to run the same tests > > > cross-compiled to JS. I'm about to start porting the Mustella classes > to > > > JS, but I'm wondering if that is the right strategy or not. > > > > > > I was looking at the Marmotinni stuff that Erik did a while back that > > uses > > > Selenium to run tests in the browsers. The actual test seem to be > > written > > > in Java. I think it would be nice to be able to repurpose the MXML > > > mustella tests and get them to run as cross-compiled tests. I think > some > > > choices are: > > > > > > 1) See what happens when Mustella is cross-compiled. I'm pretty sure > > this > > > won't work. It could be an early test of what it will be like to > support > > > other third-party AS frameworks, but Mustella is relying on some > > low-level > > > Flash things like frame events, security sandboxes, etc, so I don't > think > > > it is a fair test. We could fork Mustella and strip some of that stuff > > > out though, but I'd rather not have a fork of Mustella around to > > maintain. > > > 2) Make parallel Mustella JS files. That's the direction I'm taking > > right > > > now. That's a valid FlexJS way since FlexJS is mostly about parallel > > > AS/JS frameworks. I still need a way to run the test in the browser > and > > > collect output. Hence the desire to see if Marmotinni could do that. > > > 3) Write some test converter that converts a Mustella MXML script into > > > Java code or maybe an XML representation that some Java code could > > > interpret to execute the test. > > > 4) Just re-write every test in Java. > > > 5) Something I haven't thought of yet. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
