Is it possible to compare a data driven value with an extracted value without going into the code behind window?
For Instance, I have a data driven test that wants to check the value of a particular field and then write to the field depending on what value is already present. The method would be to extract the current value into an extracted variable $(MyExtractedValue), then compare it with the value that is held in the data $(MyDataValue). So far I have not found a way to do this without going into VB.
Thanks,
Nigel Edwards, Transition Computing.
3 Answers, 1 is accepted
you can use a workaround to achieve this, but it's not very graceful.
Let's image you have a text input filed (a control you can write into).
You can have step:
1) Type $(someText) into control where someText is a variable that stores an extracted value
2) Verify input 'SomeInput' value 'Exact' '$(textFromData). where textFromData is the name of a column from your data source.
Basically, first you type in the extracted value into a field. Then you use a Verification to verify the text against a value from your datasource.
Regards,
Stoich
the Telerik team
Test Studio Trainings
Rank 2
Rank 1
Stoich:
According to Nigel's post, the test needs to "check the value of a particular field and then write to the field depending on what value is already present". So it seems to me the code would be (using Nigel's variable names):
IF(Verify input 'SomeInput' value 'Exact' '$(MyDataValue)' )
.Type $(someText) into control
ELSE
Comment: Do nothing // this statement is here for clarity - it is optional in the real code.
Nigel:
The above is ideal if what you want to write to the field is the same regardless of $(MyDataValue) - or the value that you type in can be computed using purely recorded steps (the steps to compute/extract the typed in value can be inside the if statement or come before it depending on your requirements). If that is not the case, then I think you would be better off implementing the step as a coded step in VB. Is there a reason you are reluctant to go to code-behind?
Hope that helps,
Shashi