add feature is redundant

[hansneddyanto]

The add feature seems redundant because whatever that can be done by addf, it can also be done by add. This may cause confusion to users, because they might be confused on when to use 'add' and when to use 'addf'.

How to resolve:

• Remove the current add feature, and perhaps change the naming of 'addf' into 'add' for user-friendliness.

[nus-se-bot]

Team's Response

Thank you for the bug. We agree that the addf command is able to achieve what the add command is able to do and more. When we were initially working on the application, we wanted to give a clear distinction between the features so that new users would have an easier time understanding it. Furthermore, due to the large number of parameters required for the addf command, it might get confusing for new users. So we wanted users to remember the add command as a fast method to add patients and the addf command to be a somewhat longer method to add patients with additional fields.

The bug reported is more of a suggestion and it does not impede the usage of the application itself. Hence, we have assigned this bug as NotInScope.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.NotInScope]

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: Thank you for the response, however I do not agree that this is under NotInScope. As a first-time user myself, I think that remembering that "the add command as a fast method to add patients and the addf command to be a somewhat longer method to add patients with additional fields" is more confusing, rather than just having one function (add) that can take in optional fields. There should not be a 'clear distinction' between add and addf, because they are fundamentally the same feature.

Furthermore, below is how a bug can be considered as NotInScope:

In the case of this bug, by having only one function that can take in optional fields as per what I suggested, there will be less features supported than the current implementation, so there is less code that should be implemented, and so there should be more effort that can be spent on other more important tasks. Therefore, I argue that this should be in scope.

---