MD Settings: Test for section expand/collapse navigation.

CLOSED, needs to be more robust.

MD Settings: Test for section expand/collapse navigation.

Something of an experiment we could build on to test transitions on the page.
This would have caught several of the regressions of the past few weeks.

I have tried to make this work for any reasonable window size and warn instead
of failing should something go wrong in the animation timing. Hopefully it's
sufficiently robusts.

BUG=633262
R=dbeam@chromium.org,tommycli@chromium.org

[michaelpg, 2016-08-01 21:54:48]

forgot to send.....

[tommycli, 2016-08-01 22:56:10]

some initial comments, but i haven't looked at the whole thing.

I'm not sure I'm qualified to review this whole thing. It looks pretty exotic.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
File chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:20: *    
testAfter: function()
Was this supposed to be testEndState?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:59: })();
Wow that block above is exotic.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:74: var
BUFFER = 10;
Is this leftover?

[michaelpg, 2016-08-04 00:56:48]

having some issues with flakiness... might wait on actually trying to land this

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
File chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:20: *    
testAfter: function()
On 2016/08/01 22:56:10, tommycli wrote:
> Was this supposed to be testEndState?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:59: })();
On 2016/08/01 22:56:10, tommycli wrote:
> Wow that block above is exotic.

Well the recursive function to check for a condition is pretty common. This is
how dstockwell recommended waiting on arbitrary animations to start.

But we're also trying to log when the condition actually changed, which adds
more math. :-\

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webui/sett...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:74: var
BUFFER = 10;
On 2016/08/01 22:56:10, tommycli wrote:
> Is this leftover?

I'm now seeing occasional flakes with any kind of buffering. The latest patch
just waits for the timeout multiple times, but IDK if that's guaranteed to work.

[michaelpg, 2016-08-04 01:09:10]

The CQ bit was checked by michaelpg@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 01:09:46]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 01:43:30]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 01:43:31]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)
  mac_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)

[Dan Beam, 2016-08-19 02:09:16]

why are these 400 lines of hard to read code better than my or a test engineer's
use of the settings page for 1m?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/40001/chrome/test/data/webui/...
File chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/40001/chrome/test/data/webui/...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:20: *    
testEndState: function()
nit: indent off

https://codereview.chromium.org/2198203002/diff/40001/chrome/test/data/webui/...
chrome/test/data/webui/settings/settings_transitions_browsertest.js:31: var
kMaxAttempts = 2;
this is C++ style, this should probably be MAX_ATTEMPTS

[Dan Beam, 2016-08-19 02:09:48]

On 2016/08/19 02:09:16, Dan Beam wrote:
> why are these 400 lines of hard to read code better than my or a test
engineer's
> use of the settings page for 1m?

talking specifically about settings_transitions_browsertest.js

[michaelpg, 2016-08-19 06:12:25]

Description was changed from

==========
MD Settings: Test for section expand/collapse navigation.

Something of an experiment we could build on to test transitions on the page.
This would have caught several of the regressions of the past few weeks.

I have tried to make this work for any reasonable window size and warn instead
of failing should something go wrong in the animation timing. Hopefully it's
sufficiently robusts.

BUG=633262
R=dbeam@chromium.org,tommycli@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
CLOSED, needs to be more robust.

MD Settings: Test for section expand/collapse navigation.

Something of an experiment we could build on to test transitions on the page.
This would have caught several of the regressions of the past few weeks.

I have tried to make this work for any reasonable window size and warn instead
of failing should something go wrong in the animation timing. Hopefully it's
sufficiently robusts.

BUG=633262
R=dbeam@chromium.org,tommycli@chromium.org
==========