ANONYMOUS wrote:
> With the way in which our code is currently written, we are able to accomplish all of the tasks set out in the description of the project. However, we are only able to do these to directories that are in the present working directory. Changing the code to allow for absolute directories as well as relative ones is proving to be very difficult, with the way in which we are storing relative paths to keep track of directory levels and contents. How many marks would be lost if the absolute functionality was not included?
Marking is not about losing marks, there is no 'negative marking', it's about awarding marks for (in our projects) things that work correctly, as required. I appreciate that you've described your situation, but I can't really see a reason why the project should work with relative pathnames, but not absolute ones.
So you may not be awarded some marks for one of the automated tests if it doesn't work when provided with valid directory names on the command-line, but we try to write the tests such that you're not "hit" by the same issue in multiple tests.