Script-less vs Script-able Automation
By: Malik Pathirana
Tags: Automation Tools, Test Automation, Quality Engineering, Testing, Software Testing

script-able vs script-less

With the introduction of the selenium, software industry made progress to make the life cycle of the software development more efficient. Most of the companies used automation testing whereas test engineers used open source tools or commercial tools to create a script-able workflow where it covers the manual flow of the application. With introduction of the devops model and using CI/CD processes it played a key factor of revolutionized the current software development life cycle.

However critics were there since traditional testing is challenged with technology factors where one or more programming skills is a must to write the test scripts. So the barrier has been created with non technical and technical stake holders where testing more involves with these non technical parties. Later the industry have gone for solution to bridge this gap introducing more behavioral language scripts ATDD(Acceptance test driven development)or BDD(behavioral driven development) where tests are hidden underneath.How ever it was not the ideal solution and most of the testing tool vendors have other ideas to develop test with minimum technical effort. So script-less automation came into play where it is said that it will far more efficient for testers develop tests and run them.

While working on a product company where it has build test tools for testers had the opportunity to using both tools. And there were pros & cons with both of them which i thought very valuable to share.

Scrip-table Automation

Testers have to get used to the framework and best practices

Testers have the control over the script. They can use logic and do any operations

Most of the time script will single paradigm. This mean it can scope only for one test type since they have different applications in different platforms(web/mobile/desktop/api)

Test management support with running capability should be included with framework. Most of the time 3rd party tool have to be taken as the test manager and it can integrate to CI/CD keeping the scripts in shareable place.

Scripts are shareable and may can be used in other frameworks as well.

Script-less Automation

Tester will record a workflow using tool ,but script will not be available.

Tester will not have over all control over the script. Only some tools may provide these features as an example adding if logic and values may important to tester to a given scenario for his test.

Super efficient than any other, in my experience it can create test with 4 different pages in less than 15 minutes. With the same script in traditional tool will take at least 4 hours. So it reduces the time

Most of the script-less tool provide the test manager and the running capability. So testers do not have to think about the managing and running those most of the times these scripts are compatible only for that particular tool only.

Scripts are mostly not shareable

As per my final conclusion, tool is very much align with your objective. As a example if the mostly your testers are non technical background and you have to work in very tight deadline you may see the opportunity to use script-less automation tool. And if your testers are technical and they may get board after some time using this tool,since it may not challenging for them. Most of the companies in the industry have there own in house built tool because of below points

Cost

Talented engineers

Return on Investment (ROI)

Efficiency

Since most of these tools are very expensive they do not much see any ROI there with out any significant advantages. As testing professional it have to see through lot of areas when selecting a tool otherwise it will be a disaster.