Thank you for your reply. I agree that test automation is half-programming. The question that puzzles me is - if this is so good why nobody uses it? At least it seems so and especially with TDriver. As I understand both Squish and Testability Driver have similar approaches. But Squish is more advanced, it offers a broad language suit for testing (whereas TDriver uses only Ruby), it's better tested. I'd definitely prefer it if it was free, but I'm not sure I can persuade our employers to buy the license. But what I'm sure of is that if there were large market demands in tools like Squish there would be free alternatives, perhaps less advanced, but allowing solving similar problems (probably with a bit more efforts). This is how TDriver looks for me. But at the moment it seems abandoned while being far from perfection.

A typical example of what is needed would be like... Put several QGraphicsItems on QGraphicsScene, do some application-defined operations with them, then check that z-values of the QGraphicsItems are correct (as expected). This is a simple scenario, in practice it may be more complex. This is all done manually at the moment. I'm sure that both Squish and TDriver designed to allow it.

But as for Squish, did you use it on a regular basis during development? Did it prove worth it from the viewpoint of your employers?

Perhaps there's someone who still dealt with TDriver. Your comments would be also very welcome.