soc-se-bot
commented
1 year ago Team's Response
No details provided by team.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
Unclear over what is "one command flag" for find command
find r/aaa r/aaa This would work, but some users may think that 2 command flags are present and hence are expecting an error
I rate this a documentation bug as it should be changed to "one type of command flag". I rate it severity.low as it only affects users in rare cases. It is not severity.verylow as it is more than cosmetic error
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2223S2/pe-interim#3908] [original labels: severity.Low type.DocumentationBug]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
Yes, we forgot to mention in the UG that we will take the last entry if there are many entries of the same command flag.
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)
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: The user expectation of my issue and the other issue is different. The other issue is using two exact same "r/aaa", and is expecting an error based on UG guide. However, on my side, by using "r/egg r/Orange", it could well be a user who want to search a recipe containing BOTH egg and Orange, and is part of normal usage instead of expecting an error. Therefore, he/she will be surprised to find only orange recipes are searched.
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [ ] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** [replace this with your explanation]
The UG said that only one field for find command is allowed. However, here I used two field of the same prefix "r/". It seems that the software only matches the SECOND r/ content. If I was user, my original intention could be searching those containing BOTH eggs and Orange.