Tests for WebUI Hung Renderer Dialog

chrome/test/data/webui/hung_renderer_dialog_test.js

+// Copyright (c) 2011 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+/**
+ * Test fixture for generated tests.
+ * @extends {testing.Test}
+ */
+function HungRendererDialogUITest() {};
+
+HungRendererDialogUITest.prototype = {
+  __proto__: testing.Test.prototype,
+
+  /**
+   * Define the C++ fixture class and include it.
+   * @type {?string}
+   * @override
+   */
+  typedefCppFixture: 'HungRendererDialogUITest',
+};
+
+/**
+ * Test fixture for asynchronous tests.
+ * @extends {HungRendererDialogUITest}
+ */
+function HungRendererDialogUITestAsync() {};
+
+HungRendererDialogUITestAsync.prototype = {
+  __proto__: HungRendererDialogUITest.prototype,
+
+  /** @inheritDoc */
+  isAsync: true,
+};
+
+// Include the bulk of c++ code.
+GEN('#include "chrome/test/data/webui/hung_renderer_dialog_ui_test-inl.h"');
+
+// Constructors and destructors must be provided in .cc to prevent clang errors.
+GEN('HungRendererDialogUITest::HungRendererDialogUITest() {}');
+GEN('HungRendererDialogUITest::~HungRendererDialogUITest() {}');
+
+/**
+ * Tests that the Hung Render Dialog is working properly.
+ */
+TEST_F('HungRendererDialogUITest', 'testHungRenderer', function() {
+  // Confirm that the URL is correct.
+  assertEquals(chrome.expectedUrl, window.location.href);
+
+  // Confirm that the theme graphic is loaded and is of a reasonable size.
+  // This validates that we are integrating properly with the theme source.
+  var themeGraphic = $('theme-graphic');
+  assertNotEquals(null, themeGraphic);
+  assertGT(themeGraphic.width, 0);

[flackr, 2011/11/05 13:19:40]

Use expect for checks that aren't fatal.

+  assertGT(themeGraphic.height, 0);

[flackr, 2011/11/05 13:19:40]

I think these themeGraphic checks should be in a separate test. Their success /
failure doesn't need to affect the rest of the tests here.

[wyck, 2011/11/07 20:39:24]

My thinking is that BrowserTests are expensive to run.  ~1300 ms.  So it would
be better to have the tests performed in the same run.  Since the individual
assertions are read-only operations (I don't invoke anything special to change
the DOM or run any special javascript functions) I thought it was more
appropriate to have them in the same test.

[flackr, 2011/11/07 21:00:13]

I understand your point, however with both testable items containing assertions
a failure in one would have prevented testing the other even though they were
mutually exclusive. I think while it will take longer to run, it will provide
better feedback and test coverage in the event that one or the other test
breaks, and ultimately reduce time spent debugging failed tests (hopefully). I
may be wrong though.

+
+  // Confirm that the DOM was updated such that a list item representing the
+  // frozen tab was added to the list of frozen tabs.
+  var tabTable = $('tab-table');
+  assertNotEquals(null, tabTable);
+  assertGT(tabTable.childElementCount, 0);
+
+  // Confirm that the list item text content is the title of the frozen tab.
+  var children = tabTable.getElementsByTagName('*');
+  assertNotEquals(null, children);
+  var titleElement = children[0];
+  assertNotEquals(null, titleElement);
+  assertEquals(chrome.expectedTitle, titleElement.textContent);
+});
+