When exporting from the requirements page, you are notified if there are unsaved edits to the requirements that will not be included in your export.
Which parameter value you click on first when making a unidirectional married pair is significant as it determines the order of the constraint. "Every chimp is an ape", is not the same as, "every ape is a chimp".
The fact that the order is significant was not the most discoverable feature in Hexawise so we "promoted" it into the dialog where you select if the married pair is bidirectional or unidirectional. You now also select if the unidirectional married pair is reversed or not. The order that you click the parameter value in is now only significant for which selection is defaulted.
This is fixed now.
Hexawise no longer supports IE 7, which was released on October 18, 2006.
In certain instances an error would occur trying to cancel computation of a plan resulting in no cancellation of the request.
The link in the plan import dialog to a list of mind mapping tools that support OPML was broken.
Hexawise now officially supports Internet Explorer 10 and 11.
The wording of the tool tips on the coverage chart are now clearer.
Test strengths higher than the number of parameters are no longer shown in the strength selector.
If all you changed was a parameter value by clicking on it to edit it the plan cache was not cleared and the prior test results were retained until something else changed. Thanks to Anita and Kevin for reporting the issue.
There were some avoidable strictness issues with blank Excel sheets and unmerged cells that the plan importer could be more forgiving about and deal with. Now it does.
Thanks to Jafar for reporting the issue.
You can now click on an individual parameter value name on the Define Inputs page to edit it.
Editing a parameter value name individually preserves it in places where it's referenced rather than deleting those references:
Thanks to Jafar for reporting the issue.
Before you had to guess. Now... not so much.
There was only a warning for invalid pairs. Thanks to Kevin for reporting this.
In some rare cases, the check that prevents creating constraints in some of the cases that will cause no possible values would cause a system error.
Hexawise can now detect 3 additional causes of "no possible value" in generated test cases and proactively prevents them when you are adding value pair constraints.
If you create a new test plan and go right to auto-scripts after adding some inputs without first generating tests, the auto-scripts editing would be broken due to the auto-scripts preview functionality not being able to initiate.
The order and sequencing of user actions is an important source of variation that is often overlooked but can be the source of numerous defects. Keep this type of variation in mind when designing your test plans.
The suggestion for reducing the number of test cases by reducing the largest parameters is now more nuanced as to when and how it is applied.
The Test Plan Scorecard now maxes out at 100% when reporting the percentage of parameter values that are constrained. It doesn't make sense for this one to go all the way to 11.
When plan computations max out at less than 6-way, Hexawise now explains why the higher strength test computations are not available and the very large number of test cases that would otherwise result.
As a performance optimization, Hexawise will leave "any value" as the value in some test cases of large plans that are heavily constrained rather than suggesting a value in purple italics that will satisfy all constraints.
There was an issue where some simple plans would incorrectly report themselves as complex plans and trigger this optimization.
Thanks to Kevin for reporting this issue.
Any value replacement has to check for value pair constraints and so is inefficient as the numbers get very large. We updated the heuristics we use to decide when to leave "any value" without a replacement.
A sequence of every possible allowed structural variation in an OPML import file would confuse the importer on some parameters.
This is a classic pairwise defect. Our tests had the variations in isolation and in combination, but not at a strength (3-way) required to trigger this bug. Embarrassingly our own sample OPML input file would trigger this bug since it was an exhaustive example. (We've since added the sample to the test suite).
Thanks to Kevin for reporting this issue.
Thanks to Robin for reporting this issue.