CISSP Practice полностью

174. c. Fan-in and fan-out are based on program coupling. Fan-in is a count of the number of modules that call a given module, and fan-out is a count of the number of modules that are called by a given module. Both fan-in and fan-out measure program complexity. Check-in and check-out are program change controls where documents or data/program files will have a check-in or check-out indicator in system libraries to prevent their concurrent use by programmers and computer programs.

175. Which of the following application software libraries can raise questions about data ownership rights?

a. Test library

b. Quality assurance library

c. Reusable library

d. Production library

175. c. A reusable library can improve software productivity and quality by increasing the efficient reuse of error-free code for both new and modified application software. “Who owns the reusable code?” is a legal question that requires a careful answer due to difficulty in tracing to the original author of the software.

A test library is incorrect because it is where the new software is developed or the existing software is modified. A quality assurance library is incorrect because it is a staging area where final quality reviews and production setup procedures take place. A production library is incorrect because it is the official place where operational programs reside and execute to process data. Data ownership rights in these three libraries (test, quality assurance, and production) are clear and traceable to the author(s).

176. Which of the following application software testing approaches does not require stubs or drivers?

a. Top-down approach

b. Bottom-up approach

c. Sandwich approach

d. Big-bang approach

176. d. The big-bang approach puts all the units or modules together at once, with no stubs or drivers. In it, all the program units are compiled and tested at once.

Top-down approach is incorrect because it uses stubs. The actual code for lower level units is replaced by a stub, which is a throwaway code that takes the place of the actual code. Bottom-up approach is incorrect because it uses drivers. Units at higher levels are replaced by drivers that emulate the procedure calls. Drivers are also a form of throwaway code. Sandwich approach is incorrect because it uses a combination of top-down (stubs) and bottom-up (drivers) approaches.

177. Which of the following is a less-formal review technique?

a. Inspections

b. Traceability analysis

c. Reviews

d. Walkthroughs

177. d. A walkthrough is an evaluation technique in which a designer or programmer leads one or more other members of the development team through a segment of design or code, whereas the other members ask questions and make comments about technique, style, and identify possible errors, violations of development standards, and other problems. Walkthroughs are similar to reviews but are less formal.

Inspections are incorrect because they are an evaluation technique in which application software requirements, design, code, or other products are examined by a person or group other than the author to detect faults, violations of development standards, and other problems. Inspections are more formal than walkthroughs.

Traceability analysis is incorrect because it is the process of verifying that each specified requirement has been implemented in the design/code, that all aspects of the design/code have their basis in the specified requirements, and that testing produces results compatible with the specified requirements. Traceability analysis is more formal than walkthroughs.

Reviews are incorrect because a review is a meeting at which the requirements, design, code, or other products of software development project are presented to the user, sponsor, or other interested parties for comment and approval, often as a prerequisite for concluding a given phase of the software development process. Reviews are more formal than walkthroughs.

178. Inspections cannot detect which of the following errors in application software?

a. Incomplete requirements errors

b. Infeasible requirements errors

c. Conflicting requirements errors

d. Input/output description errors