Possible UML notation mistake in delete class implementation section of DG

[yisiox]

Description

The screenshot below is potentially an unintended mistake in the UML diagram, since the activation bars and return arrows don't seem to match up. The text description which follow this diagram also does not give much detail on the workings of this interaction.

Screenshot

Reason for Severity

As the diagram and text fail to give the reader a good idea of this part of the implementation, it hinders the reader's understanding to a notable extent.

[nus-se-script]

Team's Response

Woopsie

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue severity

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

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: With closer inspection of the DG and codebase, I believe I understand the original intention of the diagram to be that findModuleFromList() returns a corresponding module object, on which a method is called to delete a class.

However, I believe the severity should be maintained as medium for the reasons below:

• I agree it is reasonable to not include existingModule as a separate object in the diagram, but the mistake required the reader to inspect the code to verify the mechanism of interaction, diminishing the effectiveness of the diagram
• The text description below this diagram only specifies that execute deletes a class without describing any other detail, further reducing the ability of the reader to understand the mechanism of interaction, even at a not so low level
• It aligns with the course's guidelines on hinderance (necessitating double checking the code) and credibility of the diagram.

---