Watir vs. SilkTest

最新推荐文章于 2018-10-16 10:34:41 发布

原创最新推荐文章于 2018-10-16 10:34:41 发布 · 1.9k 阅读

CC 4.0 BY-SA版权

文章标签：

350 篇文章

订阅专栏

271 篇文章

订阅专栏

89 篇文章

订阅专栏

本文通过脚本运行时间、可靠性、可维护性和代码行数等方面比较了Watir和SilkTest。测试结果显示Watir在这些方面表现更优。

参考：

这篇文档从脚本运行时间、可靠性、可维护性、代码行数这几个方面比较了一下Watir和SilkTest。不过由于文章是2005年写的，今天无论是Watir还是SilkTest都有了更多的改进，因此仅作参考用。

Two scripts are being used to do the comparison. --> What type of an app was being tested? Where are the samples of these 2 scripts?

We used the following criteria to compare the two tools:

Each script was run 15 times to get the elapsed time and test out reliability.

Import script	Watir		SilkTest
Lines of Codes	60 lines of code		200+
Elapsed Time (average of 15 runs)	25 seconds		60 seconds
Reliability	No failure when ran 15 times in a row		87% with 15 runs
Maintainability	All changes are readily "seen" via View Source or getHTML command. Compare files can be done and changes can easily be made.		Changes in B1 code require updates to the page declarations. This can take between 10 and 30 minutes.
Analysis/Positions script		Watir	SilkTest
Lines of Codes		105 lines of code	250+
Elapsed Time (average of 15 runs)		52 seconds	120 seconds
Reliability		No failure when ran 15 times in a row	80% with 15 runs
Maintainability		All changes are readily "seen" via View Source or getHTML command. Compare files can be done and changes can easily be made.	Changes in B1 code require updates to the page declarations. This can take between 10 and 30 minutes.