Comparison of tools for automated tests of the graphical user interface using the the Sikuli and AutoIT example
Tomasz Paczuski
tpaczuski04@gmail.comInstitute 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 testingReferences
[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].
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
Authors
Tomasz Paczuskitpaczuski04@gmail.com
Institute of Computer Science, Lublin University of Technology, Nadbystrzycka 36B, 20-618 Lublin, Poland Poland
Authors
Beata PańczykInstitute of Computer Science, Lublin University of Technology, Nadbystrzycka 36B, 20-618 Lublin, Poland Poland
Statistics
Abstract views: 270PDF downloads: 247
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
