Refactor setting of touch actions options by mykola-mokhnach · Pull Request #756 · appium/java-client

mykola-mokhnach · 2017-10-15T17:35:10Z

Change list

The idea of this PR is to unify touch action options, so it is easier to extend them.
The main reason for this change was my intension to add pressure argument to press/longPress actions for iOS. With the current implementation the count of overriden methods in TouchAction class would have grown up exponentially.

Types of changes

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)

mykola-mokhnach · 2017-10-16T19:26:34Z

@KazuCocoa I would be happy to see your feedback on this change. Would it be useful to set action options this way? If yes, then would it be necessary to have something like this implemented for Ruby/Python libs?

KazuCocoa · 2017-10-17T00:27:16Z

looks good for me. 🆗
For Ruby/Python client, it isn't probably necessary for them, but I'd like to consider a bit.

SrinivasanTarget · 2017-10-17T17:08:39Z

+ @Deprecated
+ public T moveTo(int x, int y) {
+ ActionParameter action = new ActionParameter("moveTo",
+ new MoveToOptions()


@mykola-mokhnach Isn't it absoluteOffset?

@PARAM x change in x coordinate to move through.
@PARAM y change in y coordinate to move through.
That is why I find the current approach useful, because it helps to avoid such misunderstandings while settings options ;)

@mykola-mokhnach haha makes sense.thanks :)

mykola-mokhnach · 2017-10-19T09:20:32Z

@TikhomirovSergey when do you have time to take a look at the PR?

TikhomirovSergey · 2017-10-27T22:30:21Z



-public class IOSTouchAction extends TouchAction {
+public class IOSTouchAction extends TouchAction<IOSTouchAction> {


@mykola-mokhnach Why this class is not fully deprecated?

This class will be needed to add further TouchAction extensions

TikhomirovSergey · 2017-10-27T22:31:04Z

+import io.appium.java_client.TouchAction;
+
+
+public class AndroidTouchAction extends TouchAction<AndroidTouchAction> {


What the purpose of this class?

This class will be needed in the future to add Android-specific touch actions (as well as the IOS one).
Also, there is second very Java-specific reason. This class is a specific implementation of Builder pattern with inheritance. If you check the ancestor classes they all have quite specific generic signatures and this all is done to make builder methods return appropriate class without casting, for example:
newIOSTouchAction(driver).press(...).doubleTap(...)
won't work in the previous implementation, because press returns the instance of TouchAction class instead of IOSTouchAction, where this method is implemented, so it is necessary to perform class cast:
((IOSTouchAction)newIOSTouchAction(driver).press(...)).doubleTap(...)
This approach fixes it, but now Java prevents one from passing TouchAction as a generic parameter, so Supplier<TouchAction> won't work, but Supplier<IOSTouchAction> works as expected. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21086417/builder-pattern-and-inheritance has more details.

TikhomirovSergey · 2017-10-27T22:50:19Z

- ActionParameter action = new ActionParameter("doubleTap", (HasIdentity) el);
- action.addParameter("x", x);
- action.addParameter("y", y);
+ ActionParameter action = new ActionParameter("doubleTap",


Also
Won't the doubleTap be supported anymore?

It looks redundant to me. doubleTap can be easily replaced with tap(count:2) or double tap-wait-tap chains.
Would you prefer to keep it?

TikhomirovSergey · 2017-10-27T22:52:58Z

+
+package io.appium.java_client.ios.touch;
+
+import io.appium.java_client.touch.OptionsWithAbsolutePositioning;


If this class was added only for backward compatibility so I think it might be better to make it nested in IOSTouchAction

but this should be visible for TouchAction options as well.

TikhomirovSergey

@mykola-mokhnach
I generally like this PR and the idea behind it. But I have some doubds:

why there some empty classes? May some things be generilized?
is it safe to declare something like public T waitAction(ActionOptions waitOptions)? What is user will try something like to.wait(optionsWithAbsolutePositioning)? Should methods have more strict signature?

mykola-mokhnach · 2017-10-28T06:40:03Z

why there some empty classes? May some things be generilized?

See my comment above about builder generics. Also, it will be possible to add more stuff into these classes later, for example some special platform-specific gestures, which we don't support yet.

is it safe to declare something like public T waitAction(ActionOptions waitOptions)? What is user will try something like to.wait(optionsWithAbsolutePositioning)? Should methods have more strict signature?

I thought about it... From code creation perspective the current approach should not be a problem, since it's pretty obvious to see an error in the method like tap(new LongPressOptions()), which is the case for dynamically typed non-Java world. And this gives us more freedom if we want to change these options in the future without affecting the client code much. However, its good as an additional protection level from dumb users. So my point is we can always make these types more strict later if we observe complains about it.

mykola-mokhnach · 2017-11-04T07:33:33Z

Closed because of #760

…_params Mykola mokhnach's actions params: The addition to the #756

mykola-mokhnach requested review from SrinivasanTarget and TikhomirovSergey October 15, 2017 17:35

mykola-mokhnach changed the title ~~Refactor setting touch actions options~~Refactor setting of touch actions optionsOct 16, 2017

appium deleted a comment Oct 16, 2017

Refactor setting of touch actions options
55039ab

mykola-mokhnach force-pushed the actions_params branch from 3ee2aca to 55039abCompare October 16, 2017 08:44

appium deleted a comment Oct 16, 2017

Add unit tests
5fdf0e1

appium deleted a comment Oct 16, 2017

Fix checkstyle issues
95e4042

appium deleted a comment Oct 17, 2017

SrinivasanTarget reviewed Oct 17, 2017
View reviewed changes

SrinivasanTarget approved these changes Oct 19, 2017
View reviewed changes

TikhomirovSergey reviewed Oct 27, 2017
View reviewed changes

TikhomirovSergey suggested changes Oct 27, 2017
View reviewed changes

TikhomirovSergey mentioned this pull request Nov 3, 2017
Mykola mokhnach's actions params: The addition to the #756 #760
Merged
4 tasks

mykola-mokhnach closed this Nov 4, 2017

TikhomirovSergey added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2017
Merge pull request#760from TikhomirovSergey/mykola-mokhnach-actions…
a433896
…_params Mykola mokhnach's actions params: The addition to the #756

mykola-mokhnach deleted the actions_params branch December 19, 2017 19:49



		public class IOSTouchAction extends TouchAction {
		public class IOSTouchAction extends TouchAction<IOSTouchAction> {

		import io.appium.java_client.TouchAction;


		public class AndroidTouchAction extends TouchAction<AndroidTouchAction> {


		package io.appium.java_client.ios.touch;

		import io.appium.java_client.touch.OptionsWithAbsolutePositioning;

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

mykola-mokhnach commented Oct 15, 2017

Change list

Types of changes

Uh oh!

mykola-mokhnach commented Oct 16, 2017• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

KazuCocoa commented Oct 17, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mykola-mokhnach commented Oct 19, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mykola-mokhnachOct 28, 2017• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mykola-mokhnachOct 28, 2017• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

TikhomirovSergeyOct 27, 2017• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

TikhomirovSergey left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mykola-mokhnach commented Oct 28, 2017

Uh oh!

mykola-mokhnach commented Nov 4, 2017

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

mykola-mokhnach commented Oct 16, 2017•
edited
Loading

mykola-mokhnachOct 28, 2017•
edited
Loading

mykola-mokhnachOct 28, 2017•
edited
Loading

TikhomirovSergeyOct 27, 2017•
edited
Loading

TikhomirovSergey left a comment •
edited
Loading