search

bennyLCK / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Inaccurate error message provided when person index is missing #6

Open bennyLCK opened 6 months ago

bennyLCK commented 6 months ago

When the addappt d/tdy 3pm-4pm command was executed, the below error message is shown.

image.png

This error message although includes the format of the command which may remind the user to include a person index, is not what a typical user would expect.

For example, I would expect an error message like "No person index specified" which is a clearer message to the user.

nus-pe-script commented 6 months ago

Team's Response

Thank you for the input!

Not providing an index is also a way for the user to provide an invalid index. Though extending the error message to account for this specific error might be something useful for future development. Hence we believe this issue should be classified under NotInScope, following the course website's guidelines: "...rectifying it is less important (based on the value/effort considerations) than the work that has been done already (because it is fine to delay lower priority work until future iterations)."

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.NotInScope]

Reason for disagreement: As shown below is the course guidelines in determining what is not in scope: image.png

The first mandatory clause was not satisfied as there was no explicit mention on how the omission of PERSON_INDEX would affect the addappt command in the UG.

Next, because the error message can be perceived as being not accurate enough and hence not "suitable" thus not satisfying the second clause either, with reference to the guidelines shown in the screenshot below on "suitability" of an error message.

Additionally, this was also mentioned under what constitutes a feature flaw: image.png

All in all, I would have agreed with your stand regarding not in scope if the error message was something like "The person index is omitted or invalid" which includes both elements of missing person index or invalid person index being the issue, whereby differentiating between the two may be trivial since a simple visual inspection would tell the user whether he completely left it out or typed in an invalid person index.