Correcting Wrong ‘Playwright’s Advantage over Selenium” Part 3: “Playwright has Native Auto-Waiting Mechanism”
A wrong approach that brings confusion.
Let’s continue to correct the third wrong claim in this YouTube video, “Playwright vs Selenium: What Advantages Make Playwright the Winner in Automation Testing Battle 🏆”.
“Playwright Features Can be Configured in one Configuration” 👎🏽
“Playwright supports a range of Testing Types, e.g. API Testing, Component Testing, …” 👎🏽
Wrap Up
Table of Contents:
· Claim 3. “Playwright has Native Auto-Waiting Mechanism”
· Playwright waiting is generally applied
· My Selenium Test Script for the Payment Test
· FAQ
Claim 3. “Playwright has Native Auto-Waiting Mechanism”
This so-called “Auto-Waiting” is no good, as it can cause confusion unnecessarily. Remind you that Cypress has a similar thing, and its marketing team sang for it for quite some time. Did it actually win over Selenium? No, Cypress.io is dying.
“Auto-Waiting” is more like a marketing term (not sure invented by whom? Maybe Cypress marketing team?). It is, in fact, a kind of fake auto-waiting. I have written three articles on this topic:
Waiting Strategies for Test Steps in Web Test Automation
(Medium’s curators recommended this as a ‘Boosted’)
The above explained, from a technical perspective,
why ‘auto-waiting’ is unnecessary and causes problems
Selenium WebDriver waiting is sufficient, maybe a bit verbose
A simple solution to overcome that minor ‘verbose’ issue.
In this article, I will clarify from a manual testing (or end-user) perspective. After all, Web test automation is a form of end-user testing.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Agile Way to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.