Open nus-se-script opened 2 days ago
Thanks for pointing out. This is indeed a feature flaw in our product. As from the activity diagram in the DG, this behavior is expected. We assume that when users undo an operation, they are likely signaling a decision to discard the effects of the undone operation. Executing a new command suggests they are planning to move forward with a new intent or goal, rather than revisiting the undone operation.
In reality, if the user tries an invalid operation, it's unlikely they are thinking about redoing past undone operations in that moment—they are focused on resolving the issue with the current command. Hence, maybe we consider it as a flaw with low severity as it unlikely to cause inconvenience to users.
--
Background
For the
redo
command, it is stated in the UG thatNote: If a new command (excluding redo or undo ) is executed after an undo, the redo history is cleared, and further redo will not be possible.
Test Case
The below commands in sequence
addtag 2 t/pinktest
undo
cattag t/pinktest mentor
(correctly leads to unsuccessfulcattag
-ing)redo
Expected Behaviour
I'm unsure if the UG means executed, successfully or not, then I cannot redo. So I was assuming I could still
redo
(i.e. theaddtag 2 t/pinktest
result would show)Encountered Behaviour
Cannot
redo
as already at latest changeRemarks, if any
Medium as potentially could happen to the user, but can still use product. Feature flaw as feature not complete (?) yet, unless this was intended? I'm not sure
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2425S1/pe-interim#448] [original labels: severity.Medium type.FeatureFlaw]