docs: Add planned-enhancements #295
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tituschewxj
added
priority.high
wxiaoyun
approved these changes
Apr 14, 2024
Comment on lines
+1190
to
+1198
| 9. **Searching for students by their attendance in a certain week(s).** | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Currently, the `find` command only works on the name attribute of a student, meaning that we can only find a student by name. | ||
| 2. However, it is useful for a user to find students by their attendance in a certain week(s) number, so that the user can easily identify which students attended in which week(s), for easier tallying of numbers and improving how the user tracks students attendance. | ||
| 3. Hence, we plan to modify the format of the `find` command in the following way to achieve this change. The `find` command format would be changed to `find [KEYWORD]… [wk/WEEK]…`, so that the find command works on the `WEEK` parameter. | ||
| 4. The reason why `KEYWORD` and `MORE_KEYWORDS` are modified, is to handle the situation when a user wants to search for students just by attendance, so the constraint that a keyword has to be present has to be removed in order to implement this with the `find` command. We minimise the changes the original behaviour of the `KEYWORD` and `MORE_KEYWORDS` parameters. | ||
| 5. We also specify a constraint that at least one parameter must be present for `find` to execute successfully, to preserve the current behaviour that one keyword must be present. | ||
| 6. A user can now search students attendance by week number through the above changes. For example, entering `find wk/1` will find all students whose attendance is marked in week 1. | ||
| 7. Another example with multiple parameters is that `find wk/1 wk/2` will find all students whose attendance is marked in either week 1 or week 2, following the current behaviour of the `find` command with `KEYWORDS` and `MORE_KEYWORDS`.<br><br> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we allow find command to find students whose attendance is NOT marked in week 1 as well? e.g. find wk/!1 wk/!2
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can't do that, because it would count as two enhancements: by their marked attendance and by their unmarked attendance?
FAQ: Enhancement X and Y are very similar. Can we count them as one?
Answer: Only if adding one automatically adds the other. If one can be added without the other, they are counted as two enhancements.
I think it would be difficult to justify that it is just one new feature, because that is adding another feature of finding negative matches in the find command.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds the planned enhancements.
Resolves #241, resolves #175, resolves #198.
The reason why we can't combine planned enhancements for duplicate prefix checking and duplicate checking.
I tried to pick enhancements that are more serious in my opinion.
Currently duplicate phone/email is not really that serious. (low, so we may want to change this out for something more serious if any)