Inspections and Walkthroughs

Open its course - Software Quality Engineering

True/False Questions for Inspections and Walkthroughs

1 Inspections are generally considered more formal and significant contributors to the overall level of Software Quality Assurance (SQA) than walkthroughs. True View Answer

Explaination:
The level of formality differentiates a walkthrough from an inspection; because inspection findings contribute to corrective action processes and involve more rigorous preparation, they are considered more significant contributors to SQA [6].
2 In a walkthrough team, the 'Standards Enforcer' is the specialized professional responsible for focusing on maintainability, flexibility, and testability issues. False View Answer

Explaination:
The 'Standards Enforcer' role focuses on locating deviations from standards and procedures, while the 'Maintenance Expert' focuses on maintainability, flexibility, and testability issues [18].
3 To maintain effectiveness and prevent participant fatigue, it is recommended that an inspection or walkthrough session should not exceed 2 hours in duration. True View Answer

Explaination:
Both inspections and walkthroughs are recommended to be uninterrupted meetings of roughly 90 to 120 minutes (2 hours) in duration [2, 15-17].
4 According to the Galin textbook, walkthrough findings are typically transmitted to the internal Corrective Action Board (CAB) to support organization-wide process improvements. False View Answer

Explaination:
Walkthroughs are generally limited to comments on the specific document reviewed, whereas the findings of inspections are incorporated into organization-wide corrective action processes via the CAB to improve overall productivity and reduce future defects [6, 14].
5 During an inspection session, the simple act of the programmer reading the program aloud statement-by-statement is often a remarkably effective error-detection technique. True View Answer

Explaination:
The programmer usually finds many of the detected errors themselves simply by narrating the logic of the program to an audience [13].
6 Peer reviews such as inspections and walkthroughs are intended to replace computer-based testing (CBT) as a more cost-effective method of detecting logic errors. False View Answer

Explaination:
Inspections/walkthroughs and computer-based testing are complementary techniques; error-detection efficiency will suffer if one or the other is not present in the SQA process [11, 12].
7 The standard procedure for a code walkthrough involves participants 'playing computer' by mentally executing a small set of test cases through the program's logic. True View Answer

Explaination:
In a walkthrough meeting, a tester brings a small set of test cases which participants mentally execute, monitoring the state of the program on paper or a whiteboard as they walk through the logic [9, 10].
8 A major difference between the two peer review methods is that members of an inspection team are required to perform preparatory work, whereas walkthrough participants are not. True View Answer

Explaination:
The sources state that inspection team members must conduct preparatory work (reading the document and listing comments) before the session, while walkthrough participants are not requested to make meaningful preparations [6-8].
9 In a code inspection, the moderator should ideally be the author of the program to ensure the team has the best technical insights into the code. False View Answer

Explaination:
The moderator is expected to be a competent programmer but should not be the author of the program and does not necessarily need to be acquainted with the specific details of the project beforehand [3-5].
10 The primary objective of the review meeting in an inspection or walkthrough is to find and document solutions for the detected errors. False View Answer

Explaination:
The objective of the participant conference is to find errors but not to find solutions to those errors; the session is intended to test the program, not to debug it [1, 2].
11 Programmers tend to make more mistakes when correcting an error found during CBT than they make during NCBT True View Answer
12 Optimal number of group of developers in Walkthrough is three or four. True View Answer
13 Optimal number of group of developers in Walkthrough is three or four. True View Answer
14 Programmers tend to make more mistakes when correcting an error found during CBT than they make during NCBT. True View Answer
15 The earlier errors are found, the costs of correcting them is higher as well. False View Answer
16 A good readable code is big boost in comprehensive testing and debugging. True View Answer
17 Programs are written solely for machines not for developers, is a valid understanding. False View Answer

Programs

True/False Questions for Inspections and Walkthroughs

Subject Expert

Learning Experience Platform