Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Generic AppiumDriver #84

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 19, 2015
Merged

Generic AppiumDriver #84

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 19, 2015

Conversation

TikhomirovSergey
Copy link
Contributor

Hi guys! I want to propose changes that are similar as appium/java-client#182 (java client, it is still waiting for the merging or rejection).

Major change:
AppiumDriver and its subclasses are generic now. This feature will allow to user the choice of IWebElement type those instances should be found and returned.

AppiumDriver<IWebElement> driver;
//some actions

IWebElement e = driver.FindElement(By.Id("id"));
List<IWebElement> l = driver.FindElements(By.id("id"));

User can choose the desired type. IWebElement, RemoteWebElement, AppiumWebElement or subclasses are allowed. So when they will choose something that differs from IWebElement then:

AppiumDriver<AppiumWebElement> driver;
//some actions

AppiumWebElement e = driver.FindElement(By.Id("id"));
IList<AppiumWebElement> l = driver.FindElements(By.Id("id"));

AppiumWebElement e1. = e.FindElement(By.Id("id2"));
IList<AppiumWebElement> l1 = e.findElements(By.Id("id2"));

AppiumWebElement and subclasses are not generic. But their finders already return AppiumWebElement.

@Astro03 @Jonahss @bootstraponline What do you think about changes like that in C#?
I would like to merge them but release them later. There is scope of changes that I am going to implement and release as 2.0.0.0 version.

@Astro03
Copy link
Contributor

Astro03 commented Apr 13, 2015

I'm okay with doing it that way if that's how the java guys do it.. I agree
that we need to be in line with how they do things as well.

On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Sergey Tikhomirov <
notifications@github.com> wrote:

Hi guys! I want to propose changes that are similar as
appium/java-client#182 appium/java-client#182
(java client, it is still waiting for the merging or rejection).

Major change:
AppiumDriver and its subclasses are generic now. This feature will allow
to user the choice of IWebElement type those instances should be found and
returned.

AppiumDriver driver;//some actions

IWebElement e = driver.FindElement(By.Id("id"));
List l = driver.FindElements(By.id("id"));

User can choose the desired type. IWebElement, RemoteWebElement,
AppiumWebElement or subclasses are allowed. So when they will choose
something that differs from IWebElement then:

AppiumDriver driver;//some actions

AppiumWebElement e = driver.FindElement(By.Id("id"));
IList l = driver.FindElements(By.Id("id"));

AppiumWebElement e1. = e.FindElement(By.Id("id2"));
IList l1 = e.findElements(By.Id("id2"));

AppiumWebElement and subclasses are not generic. But they finders already
return AppiumWebElement.

@Astro03 https://github.com/Astro03 @Jonahss
https://github.com/Jonahss @bootstraponline
https://github.com/bootstraponline What are you think about changes
like that in C#?
I would like to merge them but release them later. There is scope of

changes that I am going to implement and release as 2.0.0.0 version.

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

#84
Commit Summary

  • Generic AppiumDriver

File Changes

Patch Links:

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#84.

@TikhomirovSergey TikhomirovSergey mentioned this pull request Apr 15, 2015
Closed
Astro03 added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2015
@Astro03
Merge pull request #84 from TikhomirovSergey/generic_appium_driver
d943da8 
Generic AppiumDriver
@Astro03 Astro03 merged commit d943da8 into appium:master Jun 19, 2015
@Astro03
Copy link
Contributor

Astro03 commented Jun 19, 2015

sorry.. didn't see this until now..

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@TikhomirovSergey @Astro03