Verbose command format

[nus-se-script]

The edit command format is verbose. Even though the target user is NUS CS Freshmen, the readability of this command is difficult at first look.

It is harder to understand especially when + can take on different meanings.

In the case of r/(+ | -)..., + refers to adding a new role, but on the same line where + symbol is mentioned again at [r/(+ | -)(MODULECODE[-ROLETYPE])+], the symbol takes on a different meaning.

---

_{[original: nus-cs2103-AY2425S1/pe-interim#1982] [original labels: type.FeatureFlaw severity.Low]}

[lithops-zty]

Team's Response

2 bug reports under 1 issue:

1. verbose edit command format
2. + having two meanings

We chose the first one.

We argue that the verbose edit command format is response.NotInScope because, referring to the textbok:

In general, a flaw can be considered NotInScope if rectifying it is less important than the work that has been done already (because it is fine to delay lower priority work until future iterations) i.e., the supposedly 'better' implementation will take more effort than the current implementation, reducing the effort available to spend on other more important tasks In addition, the following (at least one) need to be satisfied: The UG specifies it as not supported or coming in a future version. The user cannot attempt to use the missing feature or when the user does so, the software fails gracefully, possibly with a suitable error message i.e., the software should not crash.

Here, the long format is essential to capturing the full functionality of the enhanced edit command. Making it more readable will take much more effort (or even impossible, given the complexity of the command) that what has been made to formulate the existing format string. Additionally, there is no way for the user to 'use' the enhanced format string in any way.

Duplicate status (if any):

--