[Wtr-development] automatic waiting?

Alister Scott alister.scott at gmail.com
Sun Oct 17 08:21:02 EDT 2010

I'd personally be all for it.
I am currently having the same problem you've described testing an
AJAX heavy app, and I have a lot of waits of up to 50 iterations of
0.2 seconds sleep (max 10 seconds wait).

Something like you described would make my job a lot easier.


Alister Scott
Brisbane, Australia
Watir Wiki Master: http://watir.com
Blog: http://watirmelon.com
Google: http://www.google.com/profiles/alister.scott
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/alisterscott

On 17/10/2010, at 10:15 PM, Jarmo <jarmo.p at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi!
> I have been thinking about making Watir wait automatically before
> throwing Exceptions. I don't know how you are dealing currently with
> the pages with Ajax/JavaScript usage, but i find myself quite often
> using some wait_until or similar solution. It has happened quite often
> that i create a test and it's ok, but then at some CI machine it fails
> intermittently and i end up inserting some wait_until in between
> assertions or anything else.
> The problem is that sometimes JavaScript is used to redirect/refresh
> or change the DOM. All these things are not blocking #wait if i'm not
> mistaken. If JavaScript redirect/refresh is used then there is a
> possibility that there will be some random errors because Watir loads
> the page and thinks everything is ready and doesn't block in #wait
> anymore, but right then the redirect is issued and something might
> break or might not break - depending of the timing.
> So, i was thinking - why not add some 5-10 seconds wait_until into
> somewhere to not throw Exception right away if the object doesn't
> exist? Or if the object isn't visible? So, if the test is failing then
> it waits maximum of 5-10 seconds befor actually failing and if test is
> ok, then it doesn't add any extra waiting time. And there's no need to
> put all those wait_until's into every here and there. If there's some
> longer Ajax call or anything then you can still use a wait_until in
> your test with longer timeout. So it shouldn't break any backwards
> compatibility either.
> What do you guys think? Is there any reason why not to implement
> something like that?
> Jarmo
> _______________________________________________
> Wtr-development mailing list
> Wtr-development at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development

More information about the Wtr-development mailing list