anchor.diff:  solution (e.g. there is another term already used to express the same thing) or not in tune with the solution
   (e.g. it does not go well with the other terms already used).
   _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  -2.  Its implementation is not doing exactly what is advertised by the method name and the header comment.
  +. Its implementation is not doing exactly what is advertised by the method name and the header comment.
   For example, the code does not remove only prefixes; it removes `sign` from anywhere in the `s`.
  -3.  The method can be _more general_ and _more independent_ from the rest of the code. For example,
  +. The method can be _more general_ and _more independent_ from the rest of the code. For example,
   the method below can do the same job, but is more general (works for any string, not just parameters)
   and is more independent from the rest of the code (not specific to AddressBook)
   +
  
positive.code: *Case 2*. Consider the method `removePrefixSign(String s, String sign)`.
  While it is short, there are some problems with how it has been abstracted.
  
  1.  It contains the term `sign` which is not a term used by the AddressBook vocabulary.
  +
  _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  *A method adds a new term to the vocabulary used to express the solution*.
  
negative.code: 
  Here are some things you can do in your demonstration:
  
  . Set a 'break point'
  . Run the program in debug mode
  . 'Step through' a few lines of code while examining variable values
  . 'Step into', and 'step out of', methods as you step through the code
  . ...
  
  === Automate CLI testing `[LO-AutomatedCliTesting]`
  
  