English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Context: Albeit different approaches exist for automated GUI testing ofhybrid mobile applications, the practice appears to be not so commonly adoptedby developers. A possible reason for such a low diffusion can be the fragilityof the techniques, i.e. the frequent need for maintaining test cases when theGUI of the app is changed.  Goal: In this paper, we perform an assessment of the maintenance needed bytest cases for a hybrid mobile app, and the related fragility causes.  Methods: We evaluated a small test suite with a Layout-based testing tool(Appium) and a Visual one (EyeAutomate) and observed the changes needed bytests during the co-evolution with the GUI of the app.  Results: We found that 20% Layout-based test methods and 30% Visual testmethods had to be modified at least once, and that each release inducedfragilities in 3-4% of the test methods.  Conclusion: Fragility of GUI tests can induce relevant maintenance efforts intest suites of large applications. Several principal causes for fragilitieshave been identified for the tested hybrid application, and guidelines fordevelopers are deduced from them.

Fragility of Layout-Based and Visual GUI Test Scripts: An Assessment Study on a Hybrid Mobile Application