Weird use of index to select person

[lipwei1808]

Description

Unclear use of selection index to choose Person.

Steps to reproduce

Based on the original list, there was a person on index 4. As I want to view the payslip for the person at index 3 followed by the person at index 4

1. Run the command payslip 3
2. Run the command payslip 4
3. An invalid index is shown

Expected behaviour

Step 2 results in an error of invalid index.

Actual behaviour

I should be able to view payslip of the person at index 4 on the original list

Reason for severity

There is not a clear documentation on how the index is used. It is intuitive for the user to wish to view payslips of multiple people successively. However, with the unclear use of index, there seems to be issues with this.

Ideas

This might be caused by the use of index in finding people from the filtered list already. If so, there should have been a clearer documentation to prompt users to reset the list with list again before running any other commands

[nus-pe-script]

Team's Response

No details provided by team.

The 'Original' Bug

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

Invalid index after running command

After running payroll command, the output is shown as below:

However, when I run addleave 3 /on 19/11/2023 the index changes to 1 and error message is shown.

---

_{[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S1/pe-interim#3233] [original labels: severity.Low type.FunctionalityBug]}

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

As mentioned in the DG as shown below, to obtain the correct index, it is necessary to utilize the list function for re-listing. This ensures that our application updates the accurate index for the employee.

Items for the Tester to Verify

❓ Issue duplicate status

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

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---

❓ Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---

❓ Issue type

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

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---

❓ Issue severity

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

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---