I am pretty sure the answer to this question is no, but I have not found any confirmation of that so here it goes. Does Robotium Solo.waitForFragmentByTag support child fragments?
Well, according to source code, no, it doesn't support child fragments, because it uses only fragmentActivity.getSupportFragmentManager().
Seems that the only option to assert child fragment is to get it from current fragment with getChildFragmentManager().findFragmentByTag(..).
Related
mMediaPlayerGlue.setSeekEnabled(false);
is not hiding the seekbar like the documentation says. Is this bugged or is there another way to do it?
The only solution is, and once again due to the lack of ability to work with these classes was reflection of PlaybackSupportFragment and editing the views visibility there.
I am working on a reactjs app and was looking for editing the font size of some specific text and found the class gx-fs-sm. That should suffice what I need, but I am still trying to understand what the prefix "gx-" stands for. Is it something that can be changed or is much more for not colliding with other frameworks or custom classes that you may already be using ?
Looking over the documentation I did not get to the answer in the time I had and therefore this question. If you have other resource/article that explain succinctly the logic behind, please do share!
As per #LGSon comment, after more digging I found out that the gx- prefix is not an antd design class. The app is build on top of Wieldy custom theme and the class is added by it.
The prefix is declared in /src/styles/global/variables.less.
(Note: While I believe this is trivial for frontend devs, still it is an answer to my question)
I am having issues with Chrome throwing element stale, element not click able other element would receive click. My question more so has to do with pageFactory framework.
Given that chromedriver has these issues I would need to rewrite the selectors with offsets and other functionality to make it able to be click able correctly.
Should I make new xxxxPage.class's specifically for chrome? Or should I just incorporate all the chrome fixes into the current xxxxPage class, knowing that it will most likely work in firefox?
Or I can make a copy of the "SignIn" function for example with chrome fixes.
Basically what is the best way of keeping your final test code clean, with these changes?
Thanks
From my perspective the page object should describe the page elements and not should be depends to the concrete driver implementation. I suggest to implement the helper common class that contains some common methods and then the specific classes that contains the specific implementation per browser. Then in your page object you will call the one common function which will call the required to the driver class/method. In other words you will encapsulate the specific driver behaviour in the specific classes and the common class will decide what specific class will called.
Is there any other alternative of usercontrol other than webpart and iframe, Which i can use in my asp.net application.
thanks in advance.
Don't know what you are trying to achieve but at the top of my head I can say you can use an update panel to act as a type of iframe to load another page inside your page.
User control is already as abstract as possible: it's final and ultimate goal is to send something to the browser, based on parameters you give it from the server side. Label has Text property that once set, send <span> tag to the browser with that given text. Panel has collection of children that when set are sent to the browser wrapped in <div> element. Etc Etc..
So the direct answer is: no, no alternative.
However, based on your comment, there might be a way to improve the performance.. what control you currently have? How user can customize them? If you can explain better the scenario and post some relevant code it would be great.
Considering your comment on the question, Using usercontrols along with placeholders and some jQuery plugins OR simply web parts controls as containers is fine.
No need to change it unless you have a problem with it. Then we might discuss other options like Custom Server controls etc.. but those also have their issues, etc.. so it's always a balance.
If you have no problem and want to check whether this is the right thing that you do or something else, then I think the answer is, yeah. Unless you have specific issues, this way seems OK to go.
Inspired by this Flex question, is it seen as better practice to dispatch an event back to the parent app, as opposed to calling a method on the instance of the parent app, from within a module?
To me it seems that the module shouldn't know what methods are available at the parent, as such approach leads to tight coupling.
Thoughts?
I think I found my answer here.