Comparison of tools for automated tests of the graphical user interface using the the Sikuli and AutoIT example
Article Sidebar
Open full text
Published:
Nov 30, 2018
Issue Vol. 8 (2018)
Articles
-
Object recognition on video from camera to computer
Oleksandr Cherednyk, Elżbieta Miłosz215-219
-
System and hardware security options available for users on devices running Android operating system
Tomasz Borysiewicz220-225
-
Efficiency of creating application’s presentation layer with frameworks AngularJS, Angular2, BackboneJS
Monika Tobiańska, Jakub Smołka226-229
-
User monitoring system using of social networks - structure and analysis of the opportunities
Sofiia Lahoda, Marek Miłosz230-234
-
Comparison of object-relational data mapping technology in Symfony 3 framework
Karol Sawłuk, Marek Miłosz235-240
-
Time analysis of the performance of Windows 10 and Windows 8.1 based on mobile application
Jacek Chmiel, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska241-246
-
Comparison of selected network communication methods on the Android platform
Przemysław Żydek, Jakub Smołka247-251
-
Comparison of tools for automated tests of the graphical user interface using the the Sikuli and AutoIT example
Tomasz Paczuski, Beata Pańczyk252-257
-
Hosting models comparison of ASP.NET Core application
Kamil Zdanikowski, Beata Pańczyk258-262
-
Performance analysis of relational databases Oracle and MS SQL based on desktop application
Grzegorz Dziewit, Jakub Korczyński, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska263-269
-
Verification methods of a programmer’s knowledge and skills
Paweł Hajduk, Norbert Wieruszewski, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska270-276
-
Possibility analysis of environmental threat monitoring with the Arduino platform
Krzysztof Lenart, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik277-281
-
Comparative analysis of mobile applications for IT project management
Ewelina Wlaszczyk, Elżbieta Miłosz282-285
-
Comparing the performance of integration platforms
Bartłomiej Karol Flis, Łukasz Kołyga, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska286-291
-
Analysis of properties of reversible steganography methods
Piotr Zimnicki, Grzegorz Kozieł292-297
-
Performance comparison of automatic tests written in Selenium WebDriver and HP UFT
Krzysztof Drążek, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska298-301
Main Article Content
DOI
Authors
Tomasz Paczuski
Institute of Computer Science, Lublin University of Technology, Nadbystrzycka 36B, 20-618 Lublin, Poland, Poland
Beata Pańczyk
Institute of Computer Science, Lublin University of Technology, Nadbystrzycka 36B, 20-618 Lublin, Poland, Poland
Abstract
The aim of the article is to compare the tools for automating user interface tests on the example of Sikula and AutoIT. The conducted research has focused on the time of testing scripts, their complexity, ease of maintenance and reliability. For the purposes of the study, an application in C # was created and several representative automatic tests were written in each tool.
Keywords:
Sikuli; AutoIT; automated testing
References
[1] Stowarzyszenie Jakości Systemów Informatycznych, Certyfikowany tester, Plan poziomu podstawowego, wersja 2011.1.1.
[2] IEEE 829 Standard for Software and System Test Documentation, IEEE Computer Society, 2008.
[3] Myers G. J., The Art of Software Testing, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2004.
[4] http://testerzy.pl/artykuly/definicja-testowaniaoprogramowania-cz-1 [11.09.2017.].
[5] Roman A., Testowanie i jakoĞć oprogramowania. Modele, techniki, narzędzia, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2016.
[6] Black R., Advanced Software Testing Vol. 2, Guide to the ISTQB Advanced Certification as an Advanced Test Manager, Rock Nook Inc., 2011.
[7] Stowarzyszenie Jakości Systemów Informatycznych, Certyfikowany tester. Sylabus dla Poziomu Zaawansowanego. Kierownik Testów, werjsa 2012.
[8] International Software Testing Qualifications, Board Certified Tester Advanced Level Syllabus - Test Automation Engineer, 2016.
[9] http://sikulix.com/ [28.02.2018].
[10] https://media.readthedocs.org/pdf/sikulix-2014/latest/sikulix2014.pdf.
[11] https://www.autoitscript.com/site/autoit/ [28.02.2018].
[12] https://opensourceforu.com/2017/01/autoit/ [dostęp 28.02.2018].
[2] IEEE 829 Standard for Software and System Test Documentation, IEEE Computer Society, 2008.
[3] Myers G. J., The Art of Software Testing, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2004.
[4] http://testerzy.pl/artykuly/definicja-testowaniaoprogramowania-cz-1 [11.09.2017.].
[5] Roman A., Testowanie i jakoĞć oprogramowania. Modele, techniki, narzędzia, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2016.
[6] Black R., Advanced Software Testing Vol. 2, Guide to the ISTQB Advanced Certification as an Advanced Test Manager, Rock Nook Inc., 2011.
[7] Stowarzyszenie Jakości Systemów Informatycznych, Certyfikowany tester. Sylabus dla Poziomu Zaawansowanego. Kierownik Testów, werjsa 2012.
[8] International Software Testing Qualifications, Board Certified Tester Advanced Level Syllabus - Test Automation Engineer, 2016.
[9] http://sikulix.com/ [28.02.2018].
[10] https://media.readthedocs.org/pdf/sikulix-2014/latest/sikulix2014.pdf.
[11] https://www.autoitscript.com/site/autoit/ [28.02.2018].
[12] https://opensourceforu.com/2017/01/autoit/ [dostęp 28.02.2018].
Article Details
Paczuski, T., & Pańczyk, B. (2018). Comparison of tools for automated tests of the graphical user interface using the the Sikuli and AutoIT example . Journal of Computer Sciences Institute, 8, 252–257. https://doi.org/10.35784/jcsi.691
Abstract views: 360
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
