A review is a systematic study of a document by a number of people with the primary goal of finding and getting rid of errors. Giving a draft record to a colleague to read is the simplest example of an assessment, and one which can usually yield a larger crop of errors than we’d have expected.
Reviews may be used to test whatever is written or typed; this may include documents such as requirement specs, system designs, code, test plans and test situations. Reviews signify the first form of screening that may take place during a software development life cycle, since the documents reviewed are normally ready a long time before the code has been written.
The practice of testing standards documents by critiquing them in early stages in the life cycle really helps to identify flaws before they become area of the executable code, and so makes those flaws cheaper and easier to remove. The same defect, if found during powerful test execution, would incur the extra cost of creating and testing the defective code initially, diagnosing the foundation of the defect, correcting the problem and rewriting the code to get rid of the defect. Reviewing code against development standards can prevent defects from appearing in test execution also, though in this case, as the code was already written, not all the additional costs and delays are avoided.
Development efficiency can be improved and timescales reduced because the correction of problems in early work-products will help to ensure that those work-products are clear and unambiguous. This should allow a developer to move more through the process of writing code quickly. Also, if defects are removed before they become executable code there will be fewer errors to find and fix during test execution. Testing costs and time can be reduced by removing the main delays in test execution, which occur when defects are found after they have grown to be failures and the tester has to wait for a fix to be shipped.
By reviewing the code and eliminating problems before they become failures the tester can move more quickly through test execution. Reduction in lifetime costs may be accomplished because fewer defects in the final software ensure that ongoing support costs will be lower. Improved communication results as authors and their peers discuss and refine any ambiguous content uncovered during review to ensure that all involved understand exactly what is being shipped.
- Have fun, and become creative
- Implementing the Safe Harbor Agreement: How Well WILL IT Work
- Support of @Valid
- 21st Century Skills
- Thank You! x 1
- An employer provides full hot lunches to employees within an ‘in-house dining facility’
- Convert Entrepreneurial nature to a Formidable Market Force
Deviations from specifications either internally described and maintained or regulatory/legitimately described by Parliament or perhaps a trade business. Requirements defects-for example, the requirements are ambiguous, or there are lacking elements. Design defects-for example, the look does not match certain requirements. Insufficient maintainability-for example, the code is too complicated to keep up.
Incorrect user interface specifications-for example, the user interface specification will not match the design or the getting or sending interface. Review procedures may differ widely in their degree of formality, where formality pertains to the known degree of structure and paperwork from the activity. Some types of review are completely informal, while others are extremely formal. The maturity of the development process: the more mature the process is, the more formal reviews have a tendency to be.