Provide a WebDriverWrapper facility to make easy to extend WebDriver

[lukeis]

Originally reported on Google Code with ID 2512

WebDriver should contain facilities to easily get started extending it.

Due to the nature of WebDriver's API with its usage of interfaces, functionalities
can't be added by subclassing the WebDriver class. The right way to do it is to use
wrappers together with dynamic proxies.

The attached patch contains two classes: WebDriverWrapper and WebElementWrapper. They
make easy to write own extensions adding new functionalities to an existing WebDriver
instance in a non intrusive way. 

The EventFiringWebDriver should probably extend the WebDriverWrapper.

The unit tests could be improved  but I don't want to spend more time on it as long
as I don't know if it will get integrated.

Reported by mguillemot@yahoo.fr on 2011-09-21 08:31:31

---

- _Attachment: [patchWebDriverWrapper.txt](https://storage.googleapis.com/google-code-attachments/selenium/issue-2512/comment-0/patchWebDriverWrapper.txt)_

[lukeis]

Issue 2183 has been merged into this issue.

Reported by barancev on 2011-09-23 22:51:14

[lukeis]

What is it you are trying to achieve here? A modern IDE can generate delegate instances
with a couple of key strokes, and the Augmenter already provides a facility for extending
webdriver instances in a configurable way.

Would it be more appropriate to allow the Augmenter to override existing interface
implementations?

Reported by simonstewart@google.com on 2011-09-24 10:24:04

[lukeis]

I'm looking for a simple way to wrap WebDriver instances and enhance them.

I don't find it a good idea to rely on the IDE to generate code here: this favors duplicated
code and it will break when the interface of the delegate changes.

I see a few problems with the Augmenter (please correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't
really investigated it in details):
- as far as I can see, it requires a test and own dispatching based on the method names
in InterfaceImplementation that simply looks ugly. A class extending a base wrapper
and implementing only the desired methods allows to write cleaner code.
- it may fail with a security manager (ok, who uses it to run tests?)
- it doesn't provide any control on the ordering of the different enhancements
- it doesn't allow to hold state information (this would be a blocker in my case)

Reported by mguillemot@yahoo.fr on 2011-09-26 06:41:58

[lukeis]

Reported by barancev on 2011-10-13 09:10:00

• Labels added: Component-WebDriver, Lang-Java

[lukeis]

Reported by barancev on 2012-05-05 08:09:07

• Labels added: Type-Enhancement
• Labels removed: Type-Defect

[lukeis]

+1 ... I just wrote something quite similar to mguille's attached patchWebDriverWrapper.txt
in https://github.com/vorburger/webdriver-runner/blob/4a529f956a8b0ba35e69fe91c7bfb7a4e5ecb8d7/webdriver-runner-core/src/main/java/ch/vorburger/webdriver/runner/core/providers/DelegatingWebDriver.java.


Just for background (not directly related to this issue), I'm doing this in order to
be able to write a concise and clearly revealing intention https://github.com/vorburger/webdriver-runner/blob/4a529f956a8b0ba35e69fe91c7bfb7a4e5ecb8d7/webdriver-runner-core/src/main/java/ch/vorburger/webdriver/runner/core/providers/NeverClosingQuittingWebDriver.java
(without having any technical code just related to delegation in that class).  The
NeverClosingQuittingWebDriver is used in https://github.com/vorburger/webdriver-runner/blob/4a529f956a8b0ba35e69fe91c7bfb7a4e5ecb8d7/webdriver-runner-core/src/main/java/ch/vorburger/webdriver/runner/core/providers/RecyclingDriverProvider.java

I don't think the Augmenter would apply in this case? What I'm using it for has nothing
to do with RemoteWebDriver.  Or may be I'm not getting it - in that case it might help
us show the way if the EventFiringWebDriver was written with the Augmenter?

Reported by michael.vorburger on 2013-09-15 13:16:15

[lukeis]

Reported by luke.semerau on 2015-09-17 17:44:25

• Labels added: Restrict-AddIssueComment-Commit