CTAL-TTA Exam Dumps : Certified Tester Advanced Level Technical Test Analyst

A Technical Test Analyst during a product risk analysis would consider the complexity of new technology as a generic risk factor. Complex new technology can introduce uncertainties and potential issues that may not be well-understood, which can increase the risk of defects. Frequency of use, visibility of failure, and high change rate of business requirements are also valid considerations, but they are more specific to particular scenarios or aspects of the product rather than the generic technological complexity which is always a concern regardless of the context.

Program tax check

Integer: tax_rate

real: tax%

BEGIN

tax% := 0

GET (tax_rate)

WHILE tax_rate > 0 loop

IF tax_rate > 3 THEN

tax_rate := 3

ENDIF

tax% := tax% + (tax_rate / 10)

tax_rate := tax_rate - 1

ENDLOOP

IF tax% > 0.6 THEN

print ("tax rate is high")

ELSEIF tax% < 0.1 THEN

print ("tax rate is zero")

ELSE

print ("tax rate is low")

ENDIF

END tax check

Explanation of Control Flow:

Initialization:

tax% := 0

Get Tax Rate:

GET (tax_rate)

While Loop:

Loop runs while tax_rate > 0.

Inside the loop:

If tax_rate > 3, set tax_rate to 3.

Update tax% by adding tax_rate / 10.

Decrement tax_rate by 1.

Post-Loop Condition Checks:

After the loop, check the value of tax%:

If tax% > 0.6, print "tax rate is high".

Else if tax% < 0.1, print "tax rate is zero".

Otherwise, print "tax rate is low".

Unreachable Code Analysis:

The ELSEIF tax% < 0.1 THEN condition (line 17) is unreachable.

In the loop, tax% is incremented by a minimum of 0.1 each time tax_rate is greater than 0.

Therefore, tax% cannot be less than 0.1 after the loop.

Conclusion:

Line 17 (ELSEIF tax% < 0.1 THEN) will never be true given the logic of the loop.

To achieve 100% decision coverage, we need to ensure that every decision (if statement) in the code has been tested for both true and false outcomes. Let's analyze the code and count the decisions:

IF (Room_price > 200)

IF (Loyalty_level = Platinum) inside Room_price > 200

ELSE within the same decision above

IF (Loyalty_level = Gold) inside the ELSE of decision 2

IF (Room_price > 150)

IF (Loyalty_level = Platinum) inside Room_price > 150

ELSE within the same decision above

IF (Discount_factor < 100%)

To cover all these decisions, we need test cases for each possible combination:

Room_price > 200 and Loyalty_level = Platinum.

Room_price > 200 and Loyalty_level = Gold.

Room_price > 200 and Loyalty_level not Platinum or Gold.

Room_price <= 200 and Room_price > 150, and Loyalty_level = Platinum.

Room_price <= 200 and Room_price > 150, and Loyalty_level not Platinum.

Room_price <= 150.

From these scenarios, we can see that the minimum number of test cases required to achieve 100% decision coverage is four:

Test with Room_price > 200 and Loyalty_level = Platinum (tests decision 1 true, 2 true, and 8 true).

Test with Room_price > 200 and Loyalty_level = Gold (tests decision 1 true, 2 false, 4 true, and 8 true).

Test with Room_price > 200 and Loyalty_level not Platinum or Gold (tests decision 1 true, 2 false, 4 false, and 8 true).

Test with Room_price <= 200 and Room_price > 150, and Loyalty_level = Platinum (tests decision 1 false, 5 true, 6 true, and 8 true).

Test with Room_price <= 200 and Room_price > 150, and Loyalty_level not Platinum (tests decision 1 false, 5 true, 6 false, and 8 true).

Test with Room_price <= 150 (tests decision 1 false, 5 false, and 8 false).

Given that these six cases test all branches, four test cases are required to ensure that all decisions are covered at least once.

Therefore, the correct answer is A. 4.