Automated input and output of Function Testing

Automated Testing has obvious effects on system performance testing and load testing, and we have to do that. We know that without a test tool for load simulation, it is almost impossible to manually test the system to complete the test task. However, in functional testing, the situation is quite different.

The advantages of manual testing in functional testing are still relatively large. I have discussed the dialectical unification of testing methods (II). The tool itself has no imagination or flexibility, however, it is easy for people to make judgments on the interface's aesthetics and Logic Rationality. Therefore, functional testing automation is mainly applied in regression testing. In addition, the UI and functions of the product are greatly changed, and the maintenance cost of automated scripts is high, input and Output often become our most important concerns. Is it cost-effective to automate testing in functional testing?

For example, if a function test case is run manuallyYes10It takes four hours to develop the script for this test case, that is, 240 minutes. This means that the test script will be run 24 times to recover the cost, if the maintenance workload of the test script is added (10%), you need to repeat the operation for 40-50 times to recover the cost. If a product version requires 2-3 rounds of tests (usually required), 15-20 versions of the product are required to recover the cost. Therefore, it is often said that product release7Versions.

How can we reduce the cost, increase the output, or recover the cost more quickly? The key is to increase the speed of script development, improve the stability of script operation, and reduce the workload of script maintenance. The main methods include:
-Select a better and more suitable testing tool
-Select a Module Suitable for Automation
-It is important to write the script as a data-driven script.
-Multiple recording scripts and structured scripts. We know that not all modules can be converted into data-driven methods. In this case, we need to abstract the script structure and make effective combinations, including layers, to form an effective hierarchy.
-Integration of testing and script development is more efficient

The following table also describes the problem. We also hope you can get better ideas.

structure	Cost	benefits	net income
No automation	0	0	0
recording and playback	8.3	11	2.7
data-driven structure using data pools	8.4	18
Framework Structure	9.8	15	5.2
Framework/data-driven (hybrid) structure focusingOn Views of the application and using data pools	11.6	19	7.4