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.

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

ByAll was re-implemented. #680

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Aug 3, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@HlebHalkouski
Contributor

HlebHalkouski commented Jul 28, 2017

Change list

ByAll was re-implemented. Now it return the fist founded element for single search.

Types of changes

What types of changes are you proposing/introducing to Java client?
Put an x in the boxes that apply

  • No changes in production code.
  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

Details

This changes improve time of seaching single element for 'All Possible' strategy. Now it doesn't search all possible elements for single.
Selenium implementation was for single search: invoke findElements method and return the first element in list.

@jsf-clabot

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jsf-clabot

jsf-clabot Jul 28, 2017

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

jsf-clabot commented Jul 28, 2017

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@mykola-mokhnach

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mykola-mokhnach

mykola-mokhnach Jul 28, 2017

Contributor

BTW, do we have any functional or unit test, which covers this method?

Contributor

mykola-mokhnach commented Jul 28, 2017

BTW, do we have any functional or unit test, which covers this method?

@TikhomirovSergey

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TikhomirovSergey

TikhomirovSergey Jul 29, 2017

Member

@mykola-mokhnach So can we merge it or do you have some concerns/remarks?

Member

TikhomirovSergey commented Jul 29, 2017

@mykola-mokhnach So can we merge it or do you have some concerns/remarks?

@mykola-mokhnach

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mykola-mokhnach

mykola-mokhnach Jul 29, 2017

Contributor

@TikhomirovSergey There was only one minor comment about checkArgument usage. Everything else looks good.

Contributor

mykola-mokhnach commented Jul 29, 2017

@TikhomirovSergey There was only one minor comment about checkArgument usage. Everything else looks good.

@TikhomirovSergey

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TikhomirovSergey
Member

TikhomirovSergey commented Aug 2, 2017

@HlebHalkouski @mykola-mokhnach I will merge it soon.

@HlebHalkouski

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@HlebHalkouski

HlebHalkouski Aug 2, 2017

Contributor

@TikhomirovSergey ok, Thank you!

Contributor

HlebHalkouski commented Aug 2, 2017

@TikhomirovSergey ok, Thank you!

@TikhomirovSergey TikhomirovSergey referenced this pull request Aug 3, 2017

Merged

PR issue fix. #686

@TikhomirovSergey TikhomirovSergey merged commit 3917b52 into appium:master Aug 3, 2017

3 checks passed

codacy/pr Good work! A positive pull request.
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
licence/cla Contributor License Agreement is signed.
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment