search

charkty / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

No output to indicate that there is no prereq #3

Open charkty opened 9 months ago

charkty commented 9 months ago

image.png

There is no output to indicate that there is no prereq for some modules, would be better to have a message because i was confused for a while why there was no output, i thought my command had an error.

nus-se-script commented 9 months ago

Team's Response

No details provided by team.

The 'Original' Bug

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

Inconsistent error message for prereq feature

The message no prerequisite was printed when user input prereq eg1311. However, when the user inputs prereq cs1231s, there is no output, nor the message is in the form as shown in the UG (sorry ....).

image.png

image.png

[original: nus-cs2113-AY2324S1/pe-interim#914] [original labels: severity.Low type.FeatureFlaw]

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

Thanks for the catch, bug accepted

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 type Team chose [`type.FeatureFlaw`] Originally [`type.FunctionalityBug`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** The main functionality of this function is to show the pre-req of modules. If typing certain modules (as per indicated in UG) does not show me the prereq, I would classify it as a functionality flaw as the "prereq" command is not doing what it is supposed to be doing, differing from the user guide. ![image.png](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/charkty/pe/main/files/ca5a4519-8234-46a3-aeac-79f7c099c242.png)
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** This bug causes occasional inconvenience to some users although they can still continue using the product, hence, it is classified as medium severity. It is not low because it is not a rare situation, given that a duplicate was found by another tester.