Skip to content

Quick Guide to Playwright Fixtures: Enhancing Your Tests

Quick Guide to Playwright Fixtures: Enhancing Your Tests

This article was written over 18 months ago and may contain information that is out of date. Some content may be relevant but please refer to the relevant official documentation or available resources for the latest information.

Introduction

Following our recent blog post on migrating E2E tests from Cypress to Playwright, we've identified opportunities to enhance our test scripts further. In this guide, we'll delve into the basics of Playwright fixtures, demonstrating their utility and flexibility in test environments.

Playwright fixtures are reusable components that set up and tear down the environment or conditions necessary for tests. They are crucial for writing clean, maintainable, and scalable tests. Fixtures can handle tasks like opening a browser, initializing a database, or logging into an application—actions you might need before running your tests.

As a practical example, we'll revisit one of the tests from our previous post, enhancing it with a new fixture to streamline the testing process and significantly improve maintainability. This post is designed to provide the foundational skills to integrate fixtures into your testing workflows effectively, giving you the confidence to manage and maintain your test scripts more efficiently.

Creating Our First Fixture

To illustrate the power of fixtures in Playwright, let’s consider a practical example from a test scenario in our project. Below is a snippet of a test case from our newsletter page:

test.describe("Newsletter page", () => {
  test("subscribing to email newsletter should show success message", async ({ page }) => {
    await page.goto("/newsletter");
    await page
      .locator(`[data-testid="newsletter-email-input"]`)
      .fill(SIGN_UP_EMAIL_TEST);
    await page.locator(`[data-testid="newsletter-submit-button"]`).click();
    await expect(
      page.getByText(/You subscribed to the newsletter successfully!/).first(),
    ).toBeVisible();
  });
});

This test scenario navigates to the newsletter page, fills in an email, submits the form, and checks for a success message. To optimize our test suite, we'll refactor common actions like navigation, form completion, and submission into reusable fixtures. This approach makes our tests cleaner and more maintainable and reduces redundancy across similar test scenarios.

Implementing the Fixture

Here’s how the fixture looks:

// NewsletterPage.fixture.ts
import type { Page, Locator } from "@playwright/test";

export class NewsletterPage {
  private readonly emailInput: Locator;
  private readonly submitButton: Locator;

  constructor(public readonly page: Page) {
    this.emailInput = this.page.locator(
      `[data-testid="newsletter-email-input"]`,
    );
    this.submitButton = this.page.locator(
      `[data-testid="newsletter-submit-button"]`,
    );
  }

  async goto() {
    await this.page.goto("/newsletter");
  }

  async addEmail(text: string) {
    await this.emailInput.fill(text);
  }

  async submitNewsletter() {
    await this.submitButton.click();
  }
}

This fixture encapsulates the actions of navigating to the page, filling out the email field, and submitting the form. By abstracting these actions, we simplify and focus our test cases.

Refactoring the Test

With the fixture in place, let’s see how it changes our original test file:

import { NewsletterPage } from "playwright/fixtures/NewsletterPage.fixture";

test.describe("Newsletter page", () => {
  let newsletterPage: NewsletterPage;

  test.beforeEach(({ page }) => {
    newsletterPage = new NewsletterPage(page);
  });

  test("subscribing to email newsletter should show success message", async ({ page }) => {
    await newsletterPage.goto();
    await newsletterPage.addEmail(SIGN_UP_EMAIL_TEST);
    await newsletterPage.submitNewsletter();
    await expect(
      page.getByText(/You subscribed to the newsletter successfully!/).first(),
    ).toBeVisible();
  });
});

A beforeEach method to reset the state of the NewsletterPage fixture ensures a clean and consistent environment for each test scenario. This practice is crucial for maintaining the integrity and reliability of your tests.

By leveraging the NewsletterPage fixture, each test within the "Newsletter page" suite starts with a clean and pre-configured environment. This setup improves test clarity and efficiency and aligns with best practices for scalable test architecture.

Conclusion

As we've seen, fixtures are powerful tools that help standardize test environments, reduce code redundancy, and ensure that each test operates in a clean state. By abstracting common setup and teardown tasks into fixtures, we can focus our testing efforts on what matters most, verifying the behavior and reliability of the software we're developing.

Remember, the key to successful test management is choosing the right tools and using them wisely to create scalable, maintainable, and robust testing frameworks. Playwright fixtures offer a pathway towards achieving these goals, empowering teams to build better software faster and more confidently.

This Dot is a consultancy dedicated to guiding companies through their modernization and digital transformation journeys. Specializing in replatforming, modernizing, and launching new initiatives, we stand out by taking true ownership of your engineering projects.

We love helping teams with projects that have missed their deadlines or helping keep your strategic digital initiatives on course. Check out our case studies and our clients that trust us with their engineering.

You might also like

Our Journey from Cypress to Playwright for E2E Testing cover image

Our Journey from Cypress to Playwright for E2E Testing

Our Journey from Cypress to Playwright for E2E Testing Introduction Adapting to unexpected technical challenges often leads to innovation. Our team faced such a moment when we discovered that our primary end-to-end (E2E) testing framework, Cypress, was incompatible with an essential component of our tech stack. This discovery led us to consider alternatives to resolve the compatibility issue and enhance our testing processes. Our choice was Playwright, a modern testing framework acclaimed for its robust features and compatibility with multiple browsers. The shift to Playwright was swift and efficient: all our E2E tests were successfully migrated within a few hours. This rapid transition highlighted our team's ability to adapt and integrate new technologies quickly. In this blog post, we will share the hands-on process we followed during the migration to Playwright, the challenges we encountered along the way, and the solutions we implemented to overcome them. Using a Test Conversion Tool We utilized a third-party test conversion tool to facilitate our migration from Cypress to Playwright, which significantly streamlined the process. Among several options available, we chose Ray's Cypress to Playwright Conversion Tool for its ease of use and effectiveness. This tool allowed us to automatically transpose our existing Cypress tests into the Playwright format. The tool processes each test script by identifying equivalent functions and commands in Playwright, translating our entire suite with minimal input. Below are some before and after images of our test scripts, demonstrating the tool's conversion capabilities. One test script written in Cypress: ` And its result converted in Playwright: ` While the tool performed impressively, converting most of our tests accurately had limitations. Certain custom helper functions and test aliases did not translate directly, and the tool clearly marked these for manual intervention. This feature was beneficial as it allowed us to quickly identify and address the segments that required our attention. Small Fixes and Fine-Tuning The initial output from the conversion tool was highly useful, yet it required some tweaks to align with Playwright's capabilities perfectly. The tool conveniently marked each unconverted function with the identifier FIXME_, making it straightforward to address these specific areas. Here’s how we tackled some of these functions: FIXME_visitWithTimeout: Originally a custom Cypress command designed to visit a URL with a specified timeout (cy.visit(url, { timeout: 30000 })), this was straightforwardly converted to Playwright's page.goto(url) FIXME_getDataCy: Another custom command (cy.get('[data-cy=""]')) was efficiently translated to Playwright’s page.locator('[data-testid=""]') FIXME_scrollTo: This native Cypress command, which scrolls the window to a specific position, proved unnecessary in Playwright. Given Playwright’s automatic detection of elements on the page, we opted to remove this command entirely ` Further refinements were made to the converted code, such as removing some "wait/delay" commands. Playwright’s robust handling of asynchronous events allowed us to streamline our tests by eliminating unnecessary pauses enhancing test execution speed and reliability. Conclusion The transition from Cypress to Playwright in our testing framework was driven by necessity but has significantly improved our testing practices. Utilizing a test conversion tool allowed us to migrate our entire suite of E2E tests efficiently, minimizing manual effort and accelerating the adoption of Playwright. Our experience highlights the importance of flexibility and the willingness to embrace new technologies in the face of unexpected challenges. The marked improvements in test execution speed and reliability, along with Playwright's advanced features, have made this transition a resounding success for our team. As we continue to refine our tests and explore the full capabilities of Playwright, we encourage other teams facing similar challenges to consider this approach. The tools and processes outlined here can serve as a roadmap for those looking to enhance their automated testing solutions....

A Look at Playwright Parallelism cover image

A Look at Playwright Parallelism

A Look at Playwright Parallelism Playwright is an open-source automation library developed by Microsoft, designed for testing web applications across multiple browsers. It enables developers and testers to write scripts that simulate real user actions when interacting with web pages. Playwright supports major browsers like Chrome, Firefox, and Safari, including their headless modes. Recently, it has gained a lot of popularity for its robustness, ease of use, and cross-browser compatibility. In this blog post, we will take a look at one very useful aspect of Playwright: running tests in parallel. Parallelism in Playwright Parallelism in Playwright refers to running multiple test spec files or even test cases within a spec file simultaneously, greatly improving test execution speed. This is achieved by running the tests in worker processes, where each worker process is an OS process, running independently, orchestrated by the test runner. All workers have identical environments, and each starts its own browser instance. Parallel execution is particularly beneficial in continuous integration and continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines, reducing overall build and testing times. Playwright's architecture inherently supports parallelism, and most modern test runners integrating with Playwright can leverage this feature. The parallel execution feature makes Playwright a highly efficient tool for large-scale web application testing. Enabling Parallelism By default, if you scaffold the project using npm init playwright@latest, parallelism is already enabled. Assuming that Playwright's configuration includes three browsers and there is a single spec file with two test cases, the total number of tests that Playwright needs to execute is 3x2 = 6. ` Playwright will decide on how many workers to use based on several factors: - Hardware support: Depending on the number of CPU cores and other system resources, the operating system will decide how many processes Playwright can spin up. - The workers property in the playwright.config.ts file. - The --workers argument to the playwright test command. For example, npx playwright test --workers 4. The --workers argument overrides the workers property in the configuration. However, in both cases, the number of workers can go up to the number of processes that Playwright can spin up, as decided by the operating system. Once it has determined the number of workers, and if the number of workers is larger than 1, Playwright will then decide how to split the work between workers. This decision also depends on several factors, such as the number of browsers involved and the granularity of the parallelism, which can be controlled in several ways: - In the test spec file, you can specify whether to run the test cases in parallel. To run tests in parallel, you can invoke test.describe.configure({ mode: 'parallel' }); before your test cases. - Alternatively, you can configure it per project by setting the fullyParallel: true property. - And finally, you can set it globally in the config, using the same property: fullyParallel: true. Therefore, if there is more than one worker and the parallel mode is enabled, Playwright will assign test cases to each worker as they become available. This scenario is ideal because it means that each test is stateless, and the resources are used most efficiently. ` Disabling Parallelism What if, however, the tests are not stateless? Imagine one test changes the global configuration of the app via some sort of administration page, and the configuration affects different parts of the app, like enabling or disabling features. Other tests, which may be testing those features, would be impacted and would report incorrect results. In such cases, you might want to disable parallelism. You can disable any parallelism globally by allowing just a single worker at any time. Following the instructions from the previous sections to configure the number of workers, you can either set the workers: 1 option in the configuration file or pass --workers=1 to the command line. ` Let's have a look at our test output in this case: ` Now, compare the time it took with one worker versus the time it took with four workers. It took 8.2 seconds with one worker compared to only 3.9 seconds with multiple workers. That might be an inefficient usage of resources, of course, especially if you have a large test suite and some of the tests are stateless and can be run without impacting other tests. Tweaking Parallelism If you want some tests not to run in parallel, but still want to utilize your workers, you can do that. Again, following the configuration options from the previous sections, you can annotate the entire spec file with test.describe.configure({ mode: 'serial' }); to have the tests run sequentially in that spec file, or use the fullyParallel: false property to run tests sequentially on the project level, or using the same property to run tests sequentially on the global level. This means you can still split the tests between workers, but the tests would be run sequentially within a worker depending on the configuration. For example, let's set the number of workers to 4, but set fullyParallel: false globally. ` The tests need to be run sequentially, but since each browser instance effectively provides an isolated environment, this means tests cannot impact each other between environments, and they are safe to be executed sequentially within an environment. This means setting fullyParallel: false on the global level is not the same as having workers: 1, since the browsers themselves offer an isolated environment for the tests to run sequentially. However, since we only have 3 environments (3 browsers), we cannot fully utilize 4 workers as we wanted, so the number of workers is 3. Conclusion In conclusion, Playwright's workers are the core of its parallelism capabilities, enabling tests to run concurrently across different environments and browsers with efficiency. Through its many configuration properties, Playwright allows you to configure parallelism at multiple levels, offering a granular approach to optimizing your test runs. Beyond just executing tests in parallel on a single machine, Playwright's parallelism can even extend to splitting work across multiple machines through sharding, significantly enhancing the scalability of your testing. We hope this blog post was useful. For those interested in delving deeper into the world of Playwright and its powerful features, we've also recently released a JS Drop titled Awesome Web Testing with Playwright, and we also hosted Debbie O'Brien from Microsoft in a Modern Web episode....

Efficiently Extract Object References in Shopify Storefront GraphQL API cover image

Efficiently Extract Object References in Shopify Storefront GraphQL API

Efficiently Extract Object References in Shopify Storefront GraphQL API Introduction So, this blog post is born out of necessity and a bit of frustration. If you're diving into the world of Shopify's Storefront API, you've probably realized that while it's powerful, extracting data in the object reference from Metadata fields or Metaobjects (in the GraphQL query) can be a bit like searching for a needle in a haystack. This complexity often arises not from the API's lack of capabilities but from the sparse and sometimes unclear documentation on this specific aspect. That's precisely why I decided to create this post. As a developer, I found myself in a situation where the documentation and community resources were either scarce or not detailed enough for the specific challenges I faced. This guide is the result of my journey - from confusion to clarity. The Situation To understand the crux of my challenge, it's essential to recognize that creating metafields and metaobjects is a common practice for those seeking a more customized and controlled experience with Shopify CMS. In my specific case, I wanted to enrich the information available for each product's vendor beyond what Shopify typically allows, which is just a single text box. I aimed to have each vendor display their name and two versions of their logo: a themed logo that aligns with my website's color scheme and an original logo for use on specific pages. The challenge emerged when I fetched a list of all vendors to display on a page. My GraphQL query for the Storefront API looked like this: ` This was when I hit a roadblock. How do I fetch a field with a more complex type than a simple text or number, like an image? To retrieve the correct data, what specific details must I include in the originalLogo and themedLogo fields? In my quest for a solution, I turned to every resource I could think of. I combed through the Storefront API documentation, searched endlessly on Stack Overflow, and browsed various tech forums. Despite all these efforts, I couldn’t find the clear, detailed answers I needed. It felt like I was looking for something that should be there but wasn’t. Solution Before diving into the solution, it's important to note that this is the method I discovered through trial and error. There might be other approaches, but I want to share the process that worked for me without clear documentation. My first step was to understand the nature of the data returned by the Storefront API. I inspected the value of a metaobject, which looked something like this: ` The key here was the gid, or global unique identifier. What stood out was that it always includes the object type, in this case, MediaImage. This was crucial because it indicated which union to use and what properties to query from this object in the Storefront API documentation. So, I modified my query to include a reference to this object type, focusing on the originalLogo field as an example: ` The next step was to consult the Storefront API documentation for MediaImage at Shopify API Documentation. Here, I discovered the image field within MediaImage, an object containing the url field. With this information, I updated my query: ` Finally, when executing this query, the output for a single object was as follows: ` Through this process, I successfully extracted the necessary data from the object references in the metafields, specifically handling more complex data types like images. Conclusion In wrapping up, it's vital to emphasize that while this guide focused on extracting MediaImage data from Shopify's Storefront API, the methodology I've outlined is broadly applicable. The key is understanding the structure of the gid (global unique identifier) and using it to identify the correct object types within your GraphQL queries. Whether you're dealing with images or any other data type defined in Shopify's Storefront API, this approach can be your compass. Dive into the API documentation, identify the object types relevant to your needs, and adapt your queries accordingly. It's a versatile strategy that can be tailored to suit many requirements. Remember, the world of APIs and e-commerce is constantly evolving, and staying adaptable and resourceful is crucial. This journey has been a testament to the power of perseverance and creative problem-solving in the face of technical challenges. May your ventures into Shopify's Storefront API be equally rewarding and insightful....

Implementing Dynamic Types in Docusign Extension Apps cover image

Implementing Dynamic Types in Docusign Extension Apps

Implementing Dynamic Types in Docusign Extension Apps In our previous blog post about Docusign Extension Apps, Advanced Authentication and Onboarding Workflows with Docusign Extension Apps, we touched on how you can extend the OAuth 2 flow to build a more powerful onboarding flow for your Extension Apps. In this blog post, we will continue explaining more advanced patterns in developing Extension Apps. For that reason, we assume at least basic familiarity with how Extension Apps work and ideally some experience developing them. To give a brief recap, Docusign Extension Apps are a powerful way to embed custom logic into Docusign agreement workflows. These apps are lightweight services, typically cloud-hosted, that integrate at specific workflow extension points to perform custom actions, such as data validation, participant input collection, or interaction with third-party services. Each Extension App is configured using a manifest file. This manifest defines metadata such as the app's author, support links, and the list of extension points it uses (these are the locations in the workflow where your app's logic will be executed). The extension points that are relevant for us in the context of this blog post are GetTypeNames and GetTypeDefinitions. These are used by Docusign to retrieve the types supported by the Extension App and their definitions, and to show them in the Maestro UI. In most apps, these types are static and rarely change. However, they don't have to be. They can also be dynamic and change based on certain configurations in the target system that the Extension App is integrating with, or based on the user role assigned to the Maestro administrator on the target system. Static vs. Dynamic Types To explain the difference between static and dynamic types, we'll use the example from our previous blog post, where we integrated with an imaginary task management system called TaskVibe. In the example, our Extension App enabled agreement workflows to communicate with TaskVibe, allowing tasks to be read, created, and updated. Our first approach to implementing the GetTypeNames and GetTypeDefinitions endpoints for the TaskVibe Extension App might look like the following. The GetTypeNames endpoint returns a single record named task: ` Given the type name task, the GetTypeDefinitions endpoint would return the following definition for that type: ` As noted in the Docusign documentation, this endpoint must return a Concerto schema representing the type. For clarity, we've omitted most of the Concerto-specific properties. The above declaration states that we have a task type, and this type has properties that correspond to task fields in TaskVibe, such as record ID, title, description, assignee, and so on. The type definition and its properties, as described above, are static and they never change. A TaskVibe task will always have the same properties, and these are essentially set in stone. Now, imagine a scenario where TaskVibe supports custom properties that are also project-dependent. One project in TaskVibe might follow a typical agile workflow with sprints, and the project manager might want a "Sprint" field in every task within that project. Another project might use a Kanban workflow, where the project manager wants a status field with values like "Backlog," "ToDo," and so on. With static types, we would need to return every possible field from any project as part of the GetTypeDefinitions response, and this introduces new challenges. For example, we might be dealing with hundreds of custom field types, and showing them in the Maestro UI might be too overwhelming for the Maestro administrator. Or we might be returning fields that are simply not usable by the Maestro administrator because they relate to projects the administrator doesn't have access to in TaskVibe. With dynamic types, however, we can support this level of customization. Implementing Dynamic Types When Docusign sends a request to the GetTypeNames endpoint and the types are dynamic, the Extension App has a bit more work than before. As we've mentioned earlier, we can no longer return a generic task type. Instead, we need to look into each of the TaskVibe projects the user has access to, and return the tasks as they are represented under each project, with all the custom fields. (Determining access can usually be done by making a query to a user information endpoint on the target system using the same OAuth 2 token used for other calls.) Once we find the task definitions on TaskVibe, we then need to return them in the response of GetTypeNames, where each type corresponds to a task for the given project. This is a big difference from static types, where we would only return a single, generic task. For example: ` The key point here is that we are now returning one type per task in a TaskVibe project. You can think of this as having a separate class for each type of task, in object-oriented lingo. The type name can be any string you choose, but it needs to be unique in the list, and it needs to contain the minimum information necessary to be able to distinguish it from other task definitions in the list. In our case, we've decided to form the ID by concatenating the string "task_" with the ID of the project on TaskVibe. The implementation of the GetTypeDefinitions endpoint needs to: 1. Extract the project ID from the requested type name. 1. Using the project ID, retrieve the task definition from TaskVibe for that project. This definition specifies which fields are present on the project's tasks, including all custom fields. 1. Once the fields are retrieved, map them to the properties of the Concerto schema. The resulting JSON could look like this (again, many of the Concerto properties have been omitted for clarity): ` Now, type definitions are fully dynamic and project-dependent. Caching of Type Definitions on Docusign Docusign maintains a cache of type definitions after an initial connection. This means that changes made to your integration (particularly when using dynamic types) might not be immediately visible in the Maestro UI. To ensure users see the latest data, it's useful to inform them that they may need to refresh their Docusign connection in the App Center UI if new fields are added to their integrated system (like TaskVibe). As an example, a newly added custom field on a TaskVibe project wouldn't be reflected until this refresh occurs. Conclusion In this blog post, we've explored how to leverage dynamic types within Docusign Extension Apps to create more flexible integrations with external systems. While static types offer simplicity, they can be constraining when working with external systems that offer a high level of customization. We hope that this blog post provides you with some ideas on how you can tackle similar problems in your Extension Apps....

Let's innovate together!

We're ready to be your trusted technical partners in your digital innovation journey.

Whether it's modernization or custom software solutions, our team of experts can guide you through best practices and how to build scalable, performant software that lasts.

Prefer email? hi@thisdot.co