nus-pe-bot
commented
3 years ago Team's Response
See response for #1611.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
Long indexes not handled for edit
Since the index is not limited to a particular maximum, the error message is inconsistent. For a very long integer, instead of telling me that the index is invalid, it says that the command format is invalid.
This error is present for INDEX parameter of edit.
For out of bounds index:
Invalid command format:
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2021S2/pe-interim#1611] [original labels: severity.Low type.FunctionalityBug]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
All these issues refer to the app response of
invalid indexfor small invalid index numbers andinvalid commandfor large invalid index numbers.As stated in the UG, this is the intended behavior.
As it was already included in the overall notes for the features in the UG, it is omitted from the details of every command using indexing to reduce repetition of details, especially as this situation has a very low possibility of occurring (our target contact list is NUS population, which easily falls within the
valid integer range).
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue duplicate status
Team chose to mark this issue as a duplicate of another issue (as explained in the Team's response above)
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
:question: Issue type
Team chose [type.FunctionalityBug]
Originally [type.FeatureFlaw]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
When I try to add a remark of someone out of index, but a small positive integer index it throws this error.
When I try to remark someone of a large positive index, I get this error even though my index is a positive integer as specified by the error parameters.