[webkit-dev] Testing feature suggestion: animation/interaction pixel-results "on the fly"

Simon Fraser simon.fraser at apple.com
Sat Feb 9 10:41:07 PST 2013

The existing pauseAnimation DRT API can stop an animation mid-flight, to allow for reliable snapshotting. Why isn't this enough?


On Feb 9, 2013, at 8:44 AM, noam.rosenthal at nokia.com wrote:

> Since people seem to agree that this is a good problem to solve, I've created a bug for it: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109356
> I can't promise to fix it myself right this moment as I'm spread a bit too thin, but if someone wants to help or pick it up before I get to it please feel free :)
> Noam
> From: ext Benjamin Poulain <benjamin at webkit.org>
> Date: Saturday, February 9, 2013 10:57 AM
> To: Noam Rosenthal <noam.rosenthal at nokia.com>
> Cc: "rniwa at webkit.org" <rniwa at webkit.org>, "webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org" <webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org>
> Subject: Re: [webkit-dev] Testing feature suggestion: animation/interaction pixel-results "on the fly"
>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:24 AM, <noam.rosenthal at nokia.com> wrote:
>>> I did not say they cannot be tested with the two methods suggested :) It's more  about a preference to move some of those decisions from the test infrastructure to the test itself, but potentially those bugs could be tested in either way.
>>> Examples for bugs I've encountered/reviewed and can use better in-motion testing (note that those are specific to Qt/EFL, but I'm sure there are tons of bugs like this that come up for Apple/Google as well)
>>> http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/140825
>>> http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/142112
>>> http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/134953
>>> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109179
>>> Controlling the clock and programmatically sampling the end result would definitely make those more testable, but of course any progress in this area would be beneficial and my preference to a canvas-based API is more of an opinion.
>> To explain my concerns:
>> Sometime, I look at a failing test, and think: "what the f**k is this supposed to test?". Then I have to dig a ton of logs, and finally read the change to understand a the single JS statement in the whole script that make the test useful. 
>> This is the situation I am afraid with a solution where pixels would be evaluated from JavaScript. You can test, but you lack visibility why something is correct or incorrect. Text tests, ref-tests and pixel tests have a great readability, you can quickly evaluate their correctness. This is important in my opinion, I don't think we want more opaque output like the RenderTree dump.
>> I am not against your plan if the readability of the tests can be good. I'd be happy to review patches toward testing dynamic changes in webpages.
>> Benjamin
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20130209/f1af3572/attachment.html>

More information about the webkit-dev mailing list