Nightwatch: Feature request: Promise-based client interface

Created on 14 Sep 2015 · 18Comments · Source: nightwatchjs/nightwatch

This would allow for interleaving synchronous and asynchronous code with nicer syntax. Promise.all could be used to parallelize commands. Adding breakpoints in between commands would work as expected, making live coding easier.

await client.url('http://www.google.com');
await client.waitForElementVisible('body', 1000);
const title = await client.title();
expect(title).to.contain('Google');

(similarly with yield or plain promises)

See https://github.com/theintern/leadfoot/blob/master/Command.js for more examples.

Is this realistic?

May be related to #121 (conditional test parts).

Source

mbixby

👍16 ❤1

Most helpful comment

Missing Promise support is big setback for me as a developer. Can you please add Promise support? I would be happy to do PR if ready to accept.

dilipkumar2k6 on 28 Oct 2016

👍20

All 18 comments

Must agree with this. I've been poking around in Nightwatch a lot recently and it's just crying out to be implemented with promises!

Matthew-Davey on 8 Oct 2015

mucsi96 on 28 Nov 2015

volodya1805 on 22 Feb 2016

gabzim on 23 Feb 2016

+1, please

aikeru on 17 Mar 2016

+1 though I fear this would be against the grain. Nightwatch does not appear interested in normal programming concepts— being limited to the fluent interface, while frustrating to real programmers who want to add breakpoints, control flow etc, is a boon to folks getting off the ground with less programming skill. I'd love to see a prototype @mbixby - I was just pondering whipping up an interface this morning whose promise resolves with an object of {client, result}, so promise steps could chain, but also get the results of an elements query, for example.

deanius on 11 Apr 2016

DutchKevv on 12 Aug 2016

I'm afraid this is not on the agenda for the near future, but we'll keep it in mind for a more significant upgrade later down the path. For now I'm closing it since it's open for a long time.

beatfactor on 15 Aug 2016

👎1

Missing Promise support is big setback for me as a developer. Can you please add Promise support? I would be happy to do PR if ready to accept.

dilipkumar2k6 on 28 Oct 2016

👍20

Has anybody tried sequenced? Maybe it can be temporary solution for devs & automation QAs.

pkantsedalov on 25 Jan 2017

This is supported by webdriver.io and nightmare
Wish for reconsideration

cheapsteak on 31 May 2017

👍1

A while after starting this feature request I realized I can achieve this by switching to a blocking API for Selenium in Ruby. I can whip up pry debugger and develop and tweak my Selenium tests live (while stopped on a breakpoint inside the program) without needing to rerun the test case in context.

There are some JS libs for Selenium with blocking API (Testium) but the debugging experience seems to be inferior.

mbixby on 1 Jun 2017

twiggy on 2 Sep 2017

I can't believe that this hasn't been addressed in more than 2 years.

alexpanov on 26 Oct 2017

👍18 👎1

Agreed.

JonEustace on 27 Oct 2017

Lack of Promises is a real deal-breaker.

leegee on 19 Apr 2018

This is a huge issue for me as well. This was OK back in the day before native promises were a thing, but now this means that we cannot write "normal" javascript code for our integration tests