search

w2vgd / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Different error message for same type of invalid command #3

Open w2vgd opened 3 years ago

w2vgd commented 3 years ago

When an invalid index is specified, depending on how large the number is, different error message will be prompted. For invalid index error message, command to reproduce is deleteTask 1234567890. For invalid command error message, command to reproduce is deleteTask 12345678901.

image.png

image.png

nus-pe-bot commented 3 years ago

Team's Response

No response provided.

The 'Original' Bug

[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]

Long index for deleteTask shows invalid command format instead of

Steps to reproduce: where there is only < 10 tasks deleteTask 99999999999999999

Instead of showing "task index provided is invalid":

image.png

It shows this:

image.png

[original: nus-cs2103-AY2021S2/pe-interim#1716] [original labels: severity.Medium type.FunctionalityBug]

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]

All the issues and duplicates arise as a result of an index above MAX_INT in java being given, resulting in the command format message appearing instead of the invalid index message.

This message appearing is a result of a constraint in the java programming language. We felt that would be too time intensive and requires too much effort for the team to look into a solution that handles the constraint of the java programming language given the endless possibilities a user can input as the index e.g. User can put in 20, 50, 100 digits as the index as well as the erratic/unpredictable outcome of having such a number being input.

Furthermore, we do not expect our users to have that many tasks stored concurrently in the app at once to refer to a task with index above MAX_INT, as this would make the app unusable. As stated in the DG, we expect the app to be able to perform normally up to 100 members and tasks. Thus we do not explicitly handle this edge case of such a high value index (above MAX_INT) and we do not believe this is a real issue users will come across, as they will not even come close to inputting such values as an index in the actual usage of our app.

Thus we are classifying this under Not in scope, taking into the consideration the issue does not result in the app crashing as well as the constraints of the programming language used and the constraints of our app (as specified, the app is not designed to handle more than 100 members and tasks concurrently), we believe this error message is acceptable.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue duplicate status

Team chose to mark this issue as a duplicate of another issue (as explained in the Team's response above)

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.NotInScope]

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

:question: Issue type

Team chose [type.FunctionalityBug] Originally [type.DocumentationBug]

Reason for disagreement: Even though the team specified that the issue is with the way the team implemented the app (using java integer thus having MAX_INT constraints), the user will not know of the implementation and will only see the error message as it is. Thus, to the user, getting two different error messages with similar input is a printing bug (and hence documentation bug) instead of a functionality bug.

:question: Issue severity

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

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]