This is the mail archive of the mauve-discuss@sourceware.org mailing list for the Mauve project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Tweaking default java.awt.Robot settings


> While it might be incorrect, I am unsure how else we can determine that
> the correct key was pressed without dispatching an event.

As I know understand it, when the Robot's keyPress is called, it
should make a keypress happen on your desktop. So if the myFrame
window has focus, a keyPress event would be generated, otherwise, if
your editor is focused, it'll get the key press.

Does anyone know if Selenium uses Robot to do its poking and prodding?

--steve

> Lillian
>
> >
> > It appears h.check is in gnu.testlet.TestHarness and that it simply
> > does an immediate check with no waiting.  The dispatchEvent call is
> > going to cause the listener to fire regardless of what's happening
> > using Robot.
> >
> > This looks like an incorrect test, and what I'd recommend is:-
> >
> > a) ditch the two lines saying KeyEvent / dispatchEvent ... they are
> > completely subverting the intent of the test
> >
> > b) insert some code so the runTest method waits for the listener to be
> > triggered.  Such as a wait and notify type of semaphor.
> >
> > c) I don't know how the test guarantees runTest executes on the event
> > dispatch thread.  Is the EDT as important to classpath as it is to
> > Sun's Swing?
> >
> > - David Herron
> >
> >
> > Steve McKayâ wrote:
> >> So would you recommend I ignore the test, delete it, add a comment, ...?
> >>
> >> --steve
> >>
> >> On 9/24/07, David Herron <David.Herron@sun.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Steve McKayâ wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi All,
> >>>>
> >>>> I've noticed that at least some of the tests using java.awt.Robot are
> >>>> non-deterministic due to lags is the underlying window system. The
> >>>> java.awt.Component.keyPressTest, for example, fails some of the time
> >>>> (on linux, windows, linux+wine, ...). It looks like enabling
> >>>> autoWaitForIdle (waits for the awt EventQueue to be empty before
> >>>> adding new events to the queue), and setting autoDelay (pauses for an
> >>>> arbitrary period of time) to some magic number of millis well above
> >>>> zero (I use 100) significantly reduces failures. Would anyone object
> >>>> to configuring the Robot with settings like this by default? If no,
> >>>> should the config mechanism be updated to allow tweaking these
> >>>> settings?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I don't know what the classpath implementation of Robot looks like, but
> >>> I do know what Sun's Linux/Unix implementation looks like (having
> >>> written the original version).
> >>>
> >>> Generally Robot has to request the OS or X11 to synthesize the event.
> >>> On Windows there's a direct API call, while on Unix/Linux there is a
> >>> child process which ends up calling XTEST extension methods.  In both
> >>> cases it means there is a nondeterministic delay due to the current
> >>> process scheduling characteristics of the given system.  In other words
> >>> it depends on an external entity, who Robot cannot coerce into
> >>> performing the request within a bounded set of time.
> >>>
> >>> I think that means depending on Robot doing it's thing within a given
> >>> period of time is an invalid test.
> >>>
> >>> Robot does not add events to EventQueue but it requests the OS to
> >>> synthesize an OS-level event.
> >>>
> >>> - David Herron
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>


-- 
Steve McKay <smckay@google.com>

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]