MENU
Which or the following would be a key difference between a peer review of code and static analysis of code using a tool?
Suggested Answer: B
Get Premium ISTQB-CTFL Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
The key difference between a peer review of code and static analysis of code using a tool lies in their approaches and scope. A peer review is a manual inspection of the code by peers or colleagues, focusing not only on the technical aspects of the code but also on other elements such as design, compliance with standards, and maintainability. Peer reviews can identify defects, suggest improvements, and ensure that the code adheres to best practices and team standards.
On the other hand, static analysis is an automated process performed by tools designed to analyze the code without executing it. These tools can detect potential issues such as syntax errors, vulnerabilities, and code smells based on predefined rules and patterns. While static analysis is technically focused, it lacks the broader perspective that human reviewers can provide, such as evaluating the code's maintainability or adherence to project-specific standards. Therefore, static analysis targets the code technically, whereas peer review encompasses a wider range of aspects, making option B the correct answer.
38 comments · newest first
CA
Carisa
11 months ago
A and D are confusing, aren't they?
SH
Shaquana
11 months ago
Definitely B, peer reviews cover more ground.
MO
Moon
11 months ago
Wait, can static analysis really find missing requirements?
AS
Ashley
11 months ago
I disagree, A makes more sense to me.
KI
Kimbery
11 months ago
I think B is spot on!
CA
Cathrine
12 months ago
I’m leaning towards option C, but I’m not completely sure. I thought static analysis was more about code quality rather than requirements.
JE
Jeanice
12 months ago
I feel like I’ve seen a question similar to this before, and I think it was about how peer reviews can catch things that tools might miss, like design flaws.
BE
Bette
12 months ago
I think option B sounds right because static analysis is more technical, but I’m a bit confused about the specifics of peer reviews.
RU
Ruthann
1 year ago
I remember we discussed how peer reviews involve human judgment, while static analysis is more about automated checks. Not sure which option that relates to though.
SA
Salome
1 year ago
I feel pretty confident about this. I think the main difference is that peer review looks for defects, while static analysis looks for failures.
AL
Alaine
1 year ago
I've got a strategy for this - I'll compare and contrast the goals and approaches of peer review and static analysis to figure out the key difference.
GI
Gilberto
1 year ago
I'm a bit confused on this one. I know peer review and static analysis are both important, but I'm not sure I fully understand the distinction.
NA
Nathan
1 year ago
Okay, let's see. I think the key difference is that peer review looks at the overall code and design, while static analysis focuses more on the technical details.
MA
Marquetta
1 year ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'll need to think carefully about the differences between peer review and static analysis.
JU
Juliann
1 year ago
This looks pretty straightforward to me. I'd go with setting the creation indicator for delivery schedule lines on the initial MRP run screen. That seems like the most direct way to achieve the goal.
JO
Johnna
1 year ago
This question seems straightforward, but I want to make sure I understand the details correctly before answering.
AJ
Aja
1 year ago
Improving EPS sounds good, but I'm not clear on how that ties in if they acquire intangible assets instead of tangible ones.
CE
Cecily
2 years ago
This is a tough one, but I'm leaning towards B. Peer review is more holistic, while static analysis is all about the nitty-gritty of the code itself.
KA
Katy
2 years ago
Haha, I bet the exam writers are having a field day coming up with these tricky options. I'm going with C - static analysis can definitely catch missing requirements that a peer review might miss.
FR
Francisca
2 years ago
I agree with you, C seems like the best choice here.
BE
Benedict
2 years ago
I'm leaning towards A, peer reviews find defects while static analysis finds failures.
CY
Cyndy
2 years ago
I think C is the correct answer too. Static analysis can definitely catch missing requirements.
LU
Luther
2 years ago
D seems like the correct answer to me. Peer reviews identify failures in the code, while static analysis tools find specific defects.
DO
Dottie
2 years ago
D) A peer reviews find failures while static analysis finds defects.
LY
Lyda
2 years ago
A) A peer reviews finds defects while static analysis finds failures.
GR
Gregoria
2 years ago
Yes, that's right. Peer reviews and static analysis serve different purposes in identifying issues in code.
TY
Ty
2 years ago
Yes, that's right. Peer reviews and static analysis serve different purposes in identifying issues in code.
MA
Madonna
2 years ago
I think D is the correct answer too. Peer reviews focus on finding failures, while static analysis tools look for defects.
TH
Thaddeus
2 years ago
I think D is the correct answer too. Peer reviews focus on finding failures, while static analysis tools focus on defects.
MA
Margurite
2 years ago
I think option B is the right answer. Static analysis is all about the technical aspects of the code, while peer review looks at broader aspects like requirements and design.
ER
Erin
2 years ago
I see, it's important to have a combination of both approaches for a thorough code review process.
FR
Frankie
2 years ago
So, would you say that both peer review and static analysis are important in ensuring code quality?
MA
Magnolia
2 years ago
Definitely, they complement each other in identifying different types of issues in the code.
GA
Gail
2 years ago
I think option A is correct. Peer reviews find defects, while static analysis finds failures.
EZ
Ezekiel
2 years ago
Yes, static analysis does focus on technical aspects, but peer review goes beyond that to consider other factors.
TO
Tonja
2 years ago
I agree, option B makes sense. Peer review is more holistic compared to static analysis.
RH
Rhea
2 years ago
But doesn't static analysis also help in finding technical issues in the code?
JA
Jamal
2 years ago
I agree, option B makes sense. Peer review is more holistic compared to static analysis.