Re: Implicit Wait

Jason Leyba <jleyba@google.com> writes:

> Let me get this straight: implicit waits are now inconsistently
> defined and implemented, and there doesn't even appear to be strong
> support for whether users should use this feature at all. So
> expanding the spec to cover all the possible scenarios for implicit
> waits is less work and less complicated than simply removing the
> feature? OK

I actually have great sympathy with the idea of removing implicit wait
polling altogether.  It would have the downside of more over-the-wire
chatter which can potentially be expensive, but this might be
acceptable.

If we are indeed going to only use implicit waits for element
retrieval, and not interaction and getting an element’s text, it’s not
a huge leap.

But I share James’ concerns about geckodriver being on the front line
here.  Moving implicit waiting to the clients will be a major breaking
change that is going to affect Firefox much worse than the other
implementors.

Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2016 18:57:40 UTC