tP:
Guidance for the item(s) below:
Some things to note as you start the v2.0 iteration:
This iteration is your last chance to add features. You are strongly discouraged from adding new features in the following iteration (i.e., v2.1). That iteration (which is shorter than usual) is best reserved for bug fixing and documentation work only.
The version you deliver in this iteration (i.e., v2.0) will be subjected a peer testing (aka PE Dry Run) and you will be informed of the bugs they find (no penalty for those bugs).
As you did in the previous iteration,
In addition,
0..1
vs 1
, composition vs aggregation*Command
classes using a placeholder XYZCommand
).ref
frames to break sequence diagrams to multiple diagrams.These class diagrams seem to have lot of member details, which can get outdated pretty quickly:
In this negative example, the text size in the diagram is much bigger than the text size used by the document:
It will look more 'polished' if the two text sizes match.
delete
command
3
participation points. Please do it before the weekly deadline.Some background: As you know, our i.e., Practical ExamPE includes peer-testing tP products under exam conditions. In the past, we used GitHub as the platform for that -- which was not optimal (e.g., it was hard to ensure the compulsory labels have been applied). As a remedy, some ex-students have been developing an app called CAT stands for Crowd-sourced Anonymous TestingCATcher that we'll be using for the PE this semester.
This week, we would like you to smoke-test the CATcher app to ensure it can run in your computer.
The steps for smoke-testing CATcher:
More Info
link in the security warning and choose Run anyway
).CS2113/T Alpha Test
, and submit.
alpha
in your GitHub account, when it asks for permission. That repo will be used to hold the bug reports you will create in this testing session.severity
and type
labels are compulsory.alpha
repo created by CATcher in your GitHub account (keep it until the end of the semester) as our scripts will look for it later to check if you have done this activity.Ensure your code is i.e., RepoSense can detect your code as yoursRepoSense-compatible and the code it attributes to you is indeed the code written by you, as explained below:
</>
icon against your name and verify that the lines attributed to you (i.e., lines marked as green) reflects your code contribution correctly. This is important because some aspects of your project grade (e.g., code quality) will be graded based on those lines.Admin Tools → RepoSense
We will be using a tool called RepoSense to make it easier for you to see (and learn from) code written by others, and to help us see who wrote which part of the code.
Viewing the current status of code authorship data:
If the code does not match the actual authorship: Given below are the possible reasons for the code shown to mismatch the code you wrote.
Reason 1: the Author name
of some of your commits is not known to RepoSense -- this is a result of not setting the git.username
property as instructed in our Git setup instructions.
How to check: Find the Author name
of your commits that are missing (you can use SourceTree or the git log
command for that -- it's not possible to do that using the GitHub interface though).
Check if that author name is included in the RepoSense config for the iP or the RepoSense config for the tP (whichever the applicable one)
Remedy: Send the missing author name(s) to the prof so that the RepoSense configuration can be updated accordingly.
Reason 2: The actual authorship does not match the authorship determined by git blame/log e.g., another student touched your code after you wrote it, and Git log attributed the code to that student instead.
Remedy: You can add @@author
annotations as explained in the panel below:
Adding @@author
tags to indicate authorship
@@author
tags indicate authorshipMark your code with a //@@author {yourGithubUsername}
. Note the double @
.
The //@@author
tag should indicates the beginning of the code you wrote. The code up to the next //@@author
tag or the end of the file (whichever comes first) will be considered as was written by that author.
Here is a sample code file:
//@@author johndoe
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
//@@author sarahkhoo
method 3 ...
//@@author johndoe
method 4 ...
If you don't know who wrote the code segment below yours, you may put an empty //@@author
(i.e. no GitHub username) to indicate the end of the code segment you wrote. The author of code below yours can add the GitHub username to the empty tag later.
Here is a sample code with an empty author
tag:
method 0 ...
//@@author johndoe
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
//@@author
method 3 ...
method 4 ...
The author tag syntax varies based on file type e.g. for java, css, fxml. Use the corresponding comment syntax for non-Java files.
Here is an example code from an xml/fxml file.
<!-- @@author sereneWong -->
<textbox>
<label>...</label>
<input>...</input>
</textbox>
...
Do not put the //@@author
inside java header comments.
👎
/**
* Returns true if ...
* @@author johndoe
*/
👍
//@@author johndoe
/**
* Returns true if ...
*/
Annotate both functional and test code There is no need to annotate documentation files.
Annotate only significant size code blocks that can be reviewed on its own e.g., a class, a sequence of methods, a method.
Claiming credit for code blocks smaller than a method is discouraged but allowed. If you do, do it sparingly and only claim meaningful blocks of code such as a block of statements, a loop, or an if-else statement.
Do not try to boost the quantity of your contribution using unethical means such as duplicating the same code in multiple places. In particular, do not copy-paste test cases to create redundant tests. Even repetitive code blocks within test methods should be extracted out as utility methods to reduce code duplication. Individual members are responsible for making sure code attributed to them are correct. If you notice a team member claiming credit for code that he/she did not write or use other questionable tactics, you can email us (after the final submission) to let us know.
If you wrote a significant amount of code that was not used in the final product,
{project root}/unused
//@@author {yourGithubUsername}-unused
to mark unused code in those files (note the suffix unused
)
e.g.//@@author johndoe-unused
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
Please put a comment in the code to explain why it was not used.
If you reused code from elsewhere, mark such code as //@@author {yourGithubUsername}-reused
(note the suffix reused
)
e.g.
//@@author johndoe-reused
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
You can use empty @@author
tags to mark code as not yours when RepoSense attribute the code to you incorrectly.
Code generated by the IDE/framework, should not be annotated as your own.
Code you modified in minor ways e.g. adding a parameter. These should not be claimed as yours but you can mention these additional contributions in the Project Portfolio page if you want to claim credit for them.
If none of the above works, please please post in the forum or contact us via cs2113@comp.nus.edu.sg
so that we can advise you what to do.
We recommend you ensure your code is RepoSense-compatible by v2.0