DEV Community

Cover image for Taking the horror out of UI testing 😱

Taking the horror out of UI testing 😱

Shi Ling on October 27, 2018

The problem isn't the broken tests. We just have very broken tools for UI testing. UI testing sucks. It really does. If you aren't already fam...
Collapse
 
kontrollanten profile image
kontrollanten • Edited

It looks really interesting! I really like your test.uilicious.com site.

I've been looking a bit into cypress.io/ How would you say that you differ from each other?

Do you have any plans for a free plan for open source projects?

Collapse
 
picocreator profile image
Eugene Cheah • Edited

Co-founder here - having given a similar answer on cypress in the snippet launch post

Cypress - focuses on chrome based testing, being embedded inside the browser itself. On the downside, while it means lack of other browser testing such as IE11, it has one of the fastest! test speeds without any of the webdriver overheads. Its test scripts are also more technical in nature.

Uilicious - on the other hand, focuses more on simulating user behaviour, across multiple browsers, including the minor slow downs and delays between actions, and key strokes. With a test scripting language to cater for the non-programmers : 90% of the time.


As for open source projects, we have in the pipeline the functionality to execute test scripts from a public git repo, similar to travis CI. Its still in extremely early stages of development. But thats the plan (no fixed date yet, as its heavily dependent on our next investment round) 🙂

Its something we are committed in doing for our FOSS community and local Engineers.SG. Hopefully paving the way for more opensource friendly companies in our country Singapore, which we feel is lacking in our asian region.

Collapse
 
kontrollanten profile image
kontrollanten

Thanks for your answer! It looks really promising! Thanks for pushing the development further in this field!

Collapse
 
david_j_eddy profile image
David J Eddy

I am also interested in this comparison.

Collapse
 
buphmin profile image
buphmin

At my company for new projects we have been using codeception with gherkin to do UI acceptance testing and it has been great. It is very similar to what is presented here just but instead of defining steps in code, you define them in gherkin. Anything to make UI testing easier is awesome. Unfortunately I have found that UI still needs some human touch to fully test.

Collapse
 
shiling profile image
Shi Ling

Yea you still do need some check things by eye, there are things like whether or not there's a red outline around erroreous input fields are hard to write automated checks for. I find that really good testers can point out not just what's not working, but what's doesn't feel right for the user in terms of UX.

Collapse
 
ben profile image
Ben Halpern

Very interesting.

Collapse
 
turnerj profile image
James Turner

This sounds like a really clever tool and I can totally see myself using that in what I'm building in the future. Great job!

Collapse
 
xowap profile image
Rémy 🤖

That looks awesome. I tried it a bit, it works fine on a few things however the handling of non-ASCII characters seems problematic :)

Collapse
 
shiling profile image
Shi Ling

Oh yeah, you're right, thanks for pointing that out. We have that working on the Pro version of the app, but this is we have a bug here on the free version. Looks like we missed out testing international languages, need to add that to our test suites. Shall get that sorted out over the next week 😉