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] | |
That's right. If these two lines... KeyEvent e = new KeyEvent(f, KeyEvent.KEY_PRESSED, 0, 0, code, chr, KeyEvent.KEY_LOCATION_STANDARD); f.dispatchEvent(e);
...are removed, myFrame.keyDown is not called and therefore, this.key is
not set. As it seems, the Robot function keyPress is not dispatching the
event to the Component.
That's not my experience. I removed the explicit dispatch lines, then
added code to make sure the window is created and focused before the
test begins. After that, the test basically works. There appear to be
occasional deadlocks, so my thread management is wonky, but the basics
work as expected.
Lillian
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
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |