Pass the ISTQB Foundation Level CTFL-Foundation Questions and answers with CertsForce

Change Man and Clear Case are examples of configuration management tools. These tools are used to manage changes in the software, track revisions, and control the versions of the code and documentation throughout the software development lifecycle. They help ensure that the integrity and consistency of the product are maintained as it evolves. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.5.2​​.

Structure-based testing, also known as white-box testing, uses information about the software’s internal structure to derive test cases. This method often involves measuring coverage, such as statement coverage or decision coverage, to ensure that different parts of the code are exercised by the tests. These techniques require a deep understanding of the software's construction and are used to validate the implementation rather than the functionality. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 4.3.1​​.

Incident management is the collection and processing of incidents raised when errors and defects are discovered. Test monitoring identifies the status of the testing activity on a continuous basis. Risk management identifies, analyses and mitigates risks to the project and the product. Configuration management is concerned with the management of changes to software components and their associated documentation and testware.

Exploratory testing is used when it is unclear what the system is supposed to do. Therefore test execution tools are of little use because expected results cannot be predicted.

However, the record feature of a test execution tool can be used to log the actions performed so that defects can be recreated (option (A)) and rectified more easily.

Incidents, or defects, are typically raised against artifacts such as requirements, documentation, and test cases when they do not meet their expected outcomes or contain errors. However, improvements suggested by users are not considered incidents, as they are enhancements or changes that users would like to see, rather than defects in the current functionality or documentation.

McCabe’s Cyclomatic Complexity is a metric used to measure the complexity of a program. It is calculated using the formula:

Cyclomatic Complexity=E−N+2P\text{Cyclomatic Complexity} = E - N + 2PCyclomatic Complexity=E−N+2P

where:

E = number of edges in the flow graph

N = number of nodes in the flow graph

P = number of connected components (usually 1 for a single program)

In the given program, there are 2 decision points (IF and THEN). The cyclomatic complexity is calculated as:

Cyclomatic Complexity=2−1+2=3\text{Cyclomatic Complexity} = 2 - 1 + 2 = 3Cyclomatic Complexity=2−1+2=3

Hence, the answer is B. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 4.3.2​​.

Designing the tests is part of the Test Analysis and Design phase, not the Test Implementation and Execution phase. The Test Implementation and Execution phase involves creating test suites, executing test cases, and comparing actual results with expected outcomes to identify any discrepancies​​.

Checking test logs against the exit criteria specified in test planning is not a major task of test implementation and execution. This activity is more related to evaluating exit criteria and reporting. Major tasks of test implementation and execution include developing and prioritizing test cases, creating test data, writing test procedures, optionally preparing test harnesses, and writing automated test scripts, logging the outcome of test execution, and verifying that the test environment has been set up correctly​​.

The amount of testing that is considered enough depends on various factors, including the level of risk associated with the application, industry standards, contractual obligations, and specific requirements. It is a risk-based decision that balances the need for thorough testing with time and resource constraints. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.2.2​​.

In the MASPAR case study, several key issues were highlighted. Security failures were attributed to untested parts of code (A), despite achieving complete statement and branch coverage, a serious bug was still missed in the MASPAR operating system (B). Additionally, an obscure error required testing the function with nearly every input value to find the two special-case failures (C). Therefore, all thesepoints together (D) illustrate the complexity and challenges in software testing. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0​​.