search

ruishanteo / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Sequence diagram for shift days creating staff object #23

Open ruishanteo opened 9 months ago

ruishanteo commented 9 months ago

Screenshot 2023-11-17 at 5.27.36 PM.png

here, there is a s:Staff object created but according to the code I don't think there is a new staff object created. It was only obtained from the model.

Screenshot 2023-11-17 at 5.28.09 PM.png

soc-pe-bot commented 9 months ago

Team's Response

Accepted as the Staff object was just obtained from the model, however the reference is indeed copied over to a new variable. Thus, the diagram is not entirely accurate, but this error does not greatly affect the conceptual cohesion of the model and it can still be understood.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue severity

Team chose [severity.Low] Originally [severity.Medium]

Reason for disagreement: The entire sequence diagram consists of too many inconsistencies (along with other bugs reported) to keep the sequence diagram still understandable.

  1. The component should be titled :Logic instead of :ShiftCommand to minimise details provided in the Logic component. (refer to forum issue #450)

Screenshot 2023-11-22 at 9.43.12 AM.png

  1. In the same issue above, the title of the object is :Ui but the method was still not specified as MainWindow.handleChangeTheme() because this mention is unnecessary.

Screenshot 2023-11-22 at 9.47.05 AM.png

  1. lastShownList is returned by :Model which is an interface. It should be :ModelManager.
  2. Staff object is not created here. It was retrieved from model.
  3. ShiftDays object is created in Logic component and should therefore not be in Model component. (refer to forum issue #398)

    As the object added is created inside the Logic component (i.e., by the Parser), it should appear inside the Logic component (i.e., similar to the second diagram)

  4. The activation bars are not consistently omitted or shown.

The sequence diagram, with these reasons above, is not correctly depicting the implementation details at all. Thus, I disagree that the errors do not greatly affect the conceptual cohesion of the model and (the diagram) can still be understood.

These errors together makes the intention of the sequence diagram hard to understand. As a tester, I do not know what details are trying to be included and what are omitted since they are not consistently omitted or included.

There should be at least one bug report on the sequence diagram that has medium severity.