Open kennethk-1201 opened 1 year ago
[IMPORTANT!: Please do not edit or reply to this comment using the GitHub UI. You can respond to it using CATcher during the next phase of the PE]
Drug and patient commands all have very similar execution pathways, therefore we believe that one diagram is sufficient to give developers a clear knowledge of the internal structure of our product. Providing more diagrams in this context does not really add too much value to the DG in our opinion.
Team chose [response.Rejected
]
Reason for disagreement: There are 16 commands in total for drug and patient. The DG only explains the implementation for 1 command. While it is definitely not necessary to have even half the amount of implementation in your DG for these 16 commands, only showing the implementation for 1 command is too little.
For example, the find drug command updates the filtered list. Perhaps that could cover all your filtering and viewing commands. However, there are still commands which create, update, and delete patients and drugs, which updates your data file itself. I believe it would be necessary to show at least 1 command among these.
Furthermore, although drug and patient commands have very similar execution pathways, the reader is a developer who does not know that, there should be at least 1 implementation for drug and another for patient, to show the similarity between the two sequences.
Showing the implementation for 1 command is too much of a stretch to be sufficient to give developers a clear knowledge of the internal structure
, when the application has 16 commands. One of the purposes of a DG is to be comprehensible. Although it is also correct to omit certain areas of the DG, only showing the implementation of 1 command is too much of a stretch.
The implementation sections only contains 2 sub sections (Find drug by trade name and pie chart), which is insufficient. It will be useful, as a developer/reader, to have a few more commands in the implementation section,