avielcx / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

remove redundant commands #16

Open avielcx opened 1 year ago

avielcx commented 1 year ago

image.png

Theres no need to unmark tasks in the unmark list

nus-pe-bot commented 1 year ago

Team's Response

We have already specified in the UG that certain commands with no effect can still be executed, but we may improve this in the future by displaying an error message instead.

image.png

The 'Original' Bug

[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]

Able to mark marked tasks

Subject of the issue

The message output by the program when marking the same task multiple times is not precise.

image.png

Your environment

OS: Windows 11

Steps to reproduce

1) Input the following command: add todo -due 15/04/2023 23:59 -rep 10 2) Input the following command: mark 1 3) Input the following command again: mark 1

Expected behaviour

There should be an error message thrown showing that the task is already marked, not for the task to be marked again.

Actual behaviour

Instead the current output message looks like this: [#00001][ID:00008][X][ ][todo ][Due by: 15 Apr 2023 23:59]


[original: nus-cs2113-AY2223S2/pe-interim#967] [original labels: severity.VeryLow type.FeatureFlaw]

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]

We have already specified in the UG that certain commands with no effect can still be executed, but we may improve this in the future by displaying an error message instead.

image.png

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)

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]


## :question: Issue response Team chose [`response.NotInScope`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** The feature flaw is undoubtedly within the scope of the TP, given that it impacts the user's experience to a large extent. Much time is wasted deciding which commands are redundant and which are not.