Chapter 3

Question 1

Static Analysis

Answer 1

• Automated activity
• Performed on the code
• Security Testing
• For safety-critical computer systems
• Applied efficiently to any work product
• With tools that evaluate work products written in natural language
  
  • Checking for spelling
  • grammar
  • readability
• Formal structure

Question 2

Benefits of Static Testing

Answer 2

• The relative cost of fixing defects

- Saves time and money

Question 3

Defects that are easier to find and fix in Static Testing

Answer 3

• Requirements defects
• Design defects
• Coding defects
• Deviations from standards
• Incorrect interface specifications
• Security vulnerabilities
• Gaps or inaccuracies in test basis traceability or coverage
• Maintainability defects

Question 4

Which TWO of the following statements about static testing are MOST true?

Answer 4

→ A cheap way to detect and remove defects

→ Early validation of user requirements

Question 5

Which of the following techniques is a form of static testing?

Answer 5

→ Code review

Question 6

What is the main difference between static and dynamic testing?

Answer 6

→ Dynamic testing requires executing the software, the software is not executed during static testing

Question 7

Planning review

Answer 7

1. Defining the scope
2. Estimating effort
3. Identify review characteristics, types, roles
4. Selecting the people to participate in the review and allocating roles
5. Defining the entry and exit criteria (our goals)
6. Checking those entry criteria are met

Question 8

Initial Review

Answer 8

1. Distributing the work
2. Explaining the scope, objectives, process, roles, and work products
3. Answering any questions that participants may have about the review

Question 9

Individual Review

Answer 9

1. Reviewing all parts of the work product

2. Noting potential defects, recommendations, and questions

Question 10

Issue Communication and Analysis

Answer 10

1. Communicating identified potential defects (review meeting)
2. Analyzing potential defects, assigning ownership and status to them
3. Evaluating and documenting quality characteristics
4. Evaluating the review findings against the exit criteria to make a review decision

Question 11

Fixing and Reporting

Answer 11

1. Creating defect reports
2. Fixing defects found
3. Communicating defects to the appropriate person or team
4. Recording updated status of defects
5. Gathering metrics
6. Checking that exit criteria are met
7. Accepting the work product when the exit criteria are reached

Question 12

Author

Answer 12

1. Create the work product under review

2. Fixed defects in the work product under review

Question 13

Manager

Answer 13

1. Is responsible for review planning
2. Executes control decisions in the event of inadequate outcomes
3. Decides on the execution of reviews
4. Assigns staff, budget, and time
5. Monitors ongoing cost-effectiveness

Question 14

Facilitator or Moderator

Answer 14

1. Ensures effective running of review meetings
2. Mediates, if necessary, between the various points of view
3. Is often the person upon whom the success of the review depends

Question 15

Review leader

Answer 15

1. Takes overall responsibility for the review

2. Decides who will be involved and organizes when and where it will take place

Question 16

Reviewers

Answer 16

1. Maybe subject matter experts, persons working on the project
2. Identify potential defects in the work product under review
3. May represent different perspectives

Question 17

Scribe or recorder

Answer 17

1. Collates potential defects found during the individual review activity
2. Records new potential defects, open points, and decisions from the review meeting

Question 18

Informal review, buddy check, pairing, pair review

Answer 18

1. Detecting potential defects
2. Generating new ideas or solutions
3. Quickly solving minor problems
4. Optional → Results documentation and checklists
5. May be performed by a colleague of the author
6. Not based on a formal process
7. May not involve a review meeting
8. Varies in usefulness depending on the reviewers
9. Very commonly used in Agile

Question 19

Walkthrough

Answer 19

1. Find defects, improve the software product, consider alternative implementations, evaluate conformance to standards and specifications
2. Exchanging ideas about techniques or styles
3. Training of participants
4. Optional → Individual preparation , checklists, defect logs and review reports
5. Mandatory → Scribe
6. Review meeting is typically led by the author of the product
7. May take the form of scenarios, dry runs
8. May vary in practice from quite informal to very formal

Question 20

Technical Review

Answer 20

1. Gaining consensus, detecting potential defects
2. Evaluating quality and building confidence in the work product
3. Generating new ideas
4. Motivating and enabling authors to improve future work products
5. Optional → Review Meeting, checklists, defect logs and review reports
6. Mandatory → Individual preparation, scribe (not the author)
7. Reviewers should be technical peers of the author, and technical experts

Question 21

Inspection

Answer 21

1. Detecting potential defects, evaluating quality and building confidence in the work product, preventing future similar defects through author learning and root cause analysis
2. Mandatory → defined process, checklists, clearly defined roles, individual preparation, entry and exit criteria, scribe, gathering metrics, defect logs and review report
3. May include a dedicated reader, who reads the work product aloud
4. Review meeting is led by a trained facilitator, no the author
5. Author cannot act as the review leader, reader or scribe

Question 22

The main purposes of ….. review type include: improving the software product, considering alternative implementations and finding defects.

Answer 22

Walkthrough

Question 23

In the ‘’Walkthrough’’ review type the ….. is mandatory and the leader of the review meeting is the …………… .

Answer 23

→ scribe / author of the work product

Question 24

In the ‘’Technical review’’ type, the ….. are mandatory, and the technical peers of the author are the …… .

Answer 24

→ individual preparation and scribe / reviewers

Question 25

The purposes of ….. review type include: preventing future similar defects through author learning and root cause, and achieving consensus.

Answer 25

→ Inspection

Question 26

Ad Hoc

Answer 26

1. Reviewers are provided with little or no guidance on how this task should be performed
2. Reviewers often read the work product sequentially, identifying and documenting issues as they encounter them
3. Is a commonly used technique needing little preparation
4. Is highly dependent on reviewer skills and may lead to many duplicates issues

Question 27

Checklist-based

Answer 27

1. Systematic technique, whereby the reviewers detect issues based on checklists that are distributed at review initiation
2. Set of questions based on potential defects, which may be derived from experience
3. Systematic coverage of typical defects types
4. Check defects outside the checklist

Question 28

Scenario and dry runs

Answer 28

1. Reviewers are provided with structured guidelines on how to read through the work product
2. Approach supports reviewers in performing “dry runs” on the work product based on the expected usage of the work product.
3. These scenarios provide reviewers with better guidelines on how to identify specific defect types than simple checklist entries
4. Reviewers should not be constrained to the documented scenarios

Question 29

Role-based

Answer 29

1. Is a technique in which the reviewers evaluate the work product from the perspective of individual stakeholder roles
2. Typical roles include specific end user types (experienced, senior) and specific roles in the organization (user administrator, performance tester)

Question 30

Perspective-based

Answer 30

1. Reviewers take on different stakeholder viewpoints in individual reviewing
2. Typical stakeholder viewpoints include end user, marketing, designer, tester, or operations
3. Leads to more depth in individual reviewing with less duplication of issues across reviewers.
4. Most effective general technique