nus-se-bot
commented
3 years ago Team's Response
With reference to nus-cs2103-AY2021S1/forum#436, we have decided to reject this bug report, as autocomplete/history features are easy to follow. How it works and is implemented is largely similar to the other commands so there is less need for diagrams.
We have lowered the severity to low as the flaw "is unlikely to affect normal operations of the product. Appears only in very rare situations and causes a minor inconvenience only." Developers would still be able to follow through if they have read other commands.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: Personally, I feel that autocomplete/history features are more unique features as compared to more generalised commands such as add, delete, edit. As a reader, I would like to see how the autocomplete/history feature is implemented clearly through the UML diagrams as they are interesting and appealing features. Also, I believe that these 2 commands are not largely similar to other commands. For example, the history feature uses a commandhistory model, which is different from the normal model that other commands such as add and delete use.
Hence, I believe there should be diagrams added to these features as it will allow readers to have a better understanding on how these features are implemented.
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.Low]
Originally [severity.Medium]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
UML diagrams can be included in these feature implementations to show the steps more visually, instead of just explaining it in text.