It is stated in the UG that although the accuracy of the existence of modules in not verified, the application at least checks that the module is formatted correctly. However i inputted some strings that can not possibly be a module code, and it was accepted. Since this is a very rare occurence i list this as very low. Hwoever, since the behaviour goes against what is stated in the user guide, I will list this as a fucntionality bug. Also it is quite hilarious that what came out is vulgar. I hope this is not the intended behaviour of your application. (though if it is, i find it entertaining)
We did not consider such a case, but at the same time, we expect our users to enter correct module details. Since this problem will most likely not happen to anyone, we dropped the severity to VeryLow.
It is stated in the UG that although the accuracy of the existence of modules in not verified, the application at least checks that the module is formatted correctly. However i inputted some strings that can not possibly be a module code, and it was accepted. Since this is a very rare occurence i list this as very low. Hwoever, since the behaviour goes against what is stated in the user guide, I will list this as a fucntionality bug. Also it is quite hilarious that what came out is vulgar. I hope this is not the intended behaviour of your application. (though if it is, i find it entertaining)
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2223S2/pe-interim#462] [original labels: severity.Low type.FunctionalityBug]