Closed georgkunze closed 3 years ago
I just thought it might be more convenient for the user if we let them enter a full waiting time instead of a polling interval. What do you think?
I just thought it might be more convenient for the user if we let them enter a full waiting time instead of a polling interval. What do you think?
@oomelianchuk and @georgkunze I haven't spotted this yet. I just tested the formal side of the code until now. But this sounds very intriguing.
@georgkunze Please adjust the logic accordingly. The polling time can be computed out of the total waiting time and the number of retries.
@georg final decision maxWaitingTime and pollingInterval you can implement a function similar to JavaScriptUtils.until
I think the changes are great now. The only thing I personally would like to change is the type of maxWaitingTime
and pollingInterval
. Selenide mostly requires waiting time in type long
, so it would be more convenient to be able to pass the same type to the optional wait methods. WDYT?
I think the changes work. There is nothing to add from my side.
I think the changes are great now. The only thing I personally would like to change is the type of
maxWaitingTime
andpollingInterval
. Selenide mostly requires waiting time in typelong
, so it would be more convenient to be able to pass the same type to the optional wait methods. WDYT?
@oomelianchuk Good point I adjusted this. Additionally, I will set up a separate issue to refacture the other timings.
148 Added optionalWaitUntilCondition and optionalWaitWhileCondition function.