7CCSMASE
Tutorial 2
1. A newly hired project manager at a company questions why the quality manager is involved in the feasibility study phase of project, rather than joining the team only when the project has been approved, as at the new manager’s previous company. What argument(s) might the quality manager offer in favour of her involvement in the feasibility study?
2. A company procedures call for peer review not only of each source code module, but also of test cases and scaffolding for testing that module. Anita argues that inspecting test suites is a waste of time; any time spent on inspecting a test case designed to detect a particular class of fault could more effectively be spent inspecting the source code to detect that class of fault. Anita’s project manager on the other hand, argues that inspecting test cases and scaffolding can be cost-effective when considered over the whole lifetime of a software product. What argument(s) might Anita’s manager offer in favour of this conclusion?
3. For each of the following statements, explain whether or not it is meaningful and if the statement is meaningless say whether there is a “quick fix” which could make the statement more meaningful.
• 100C is the boiling point of water
• Today is twice as hot as yesterday
• The program is 50 lines of code long
4. A company’s marketing division is worried about the start-up time of their new operating system. The marketing division representative suggests a software requirement stating that the start-up time shall not be annoying to users. Explain why this requirement is not verifiable and try reformulate in a verifiable way.
5. Although 100% reliability is indistinguishable from correctness, but they are not quite identical. Under what circumstance might an incorrect program be 100% reliable?
6. Can a system be correct and yet unsafe?
7. An organisation is considering whether to have separate teams for development and quality, or to have quality assurance (verification and validation) to be done by the same team. Discuss and give arguments in favour and against each arrangement.