Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

BCS Exam TAE Topic 2 Question 50 Discussion

Actual exam question for BCS's TAE exam
Question #: 50
Topic #: 2
[All TAE Questions]

Consider A TAS for testing a desktop application via its GUI. All the test cases of the automated test suite contain the same identical sequences of steps at the beginning (to create the necessary objects when doing a preliminary configuration of the test environment and at the end (to remove everything created --specifically for the test itself during the preliminary configuration of the test environment). All automated test cases use the same set of assertion functions from a shared library, for verifying the values in the GUI fields ( e.g text boxes).

What is the BEST recommendation for improving the TAS?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Contribute your Thoughts:

Alverta
2 months ago
I personally think implementing standard setup and teardown functions at test case level would be the most efficient way to improve the TAS.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antonio
2 months ago
I believe adopting a set of standard verification methods for use by all automated tests could also be a good option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Myra
3 months ago
Option B? Really? Improving the app's architecture? That's like putting lipstick on a pig. Just use Option D and move on with your life.
upvoted 0 times
Cornell
2 months ago
D) Implementing standard setup and teardown functions at test case level
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
2 months ago
C) Adopting a set of standard verification methods for use by all automated tests
upvoted 0 times
...
Rory
2 months ago
A) Implementing keywords with higher level of granularity
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Patrick
3 months ago
I'm going with Option C. Adopting a set of standard verification methods for all tests will ensure consistency and reduce errors. It's the most comprehensive solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Apolonia
3 months ago
I agree with Eloisa, having more granularity in keywords can make the test suite more flexible and easier to maintain.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alline
3 months ago
I agree with Chery. Option D is the clear winner here. Who wants to write the same code over and over again in each test case?
upvoted 0 times
Yolande
2 months ago
True, having a set of standard verification methods could also streamline the testing process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ming
2 months ago
Implementing keywords with higher level of granularity could also be helpful in improving the TAS.
upvoted 0 times
...
Valentin
2 months ago
I agree, having standard setup and teardown functions will make the test cases more consistent and easier to maintain.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brittni
3 months ago
I think option D is the way to go. It will definitely save time and make the test suite more efficient.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Eloisa
3 months ago
I think implementing keywords with higher level of granularity would be the best recommendation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chery
3 months ago
Option D is the way to go. Implementing standard setup and teardown functions at the test case level will make the test suite much more maintainable and less redundant.
upvoted 0 times
Floyd
3 months ago
I agree, having standard setup and teardown functions will save a lot of time and effort in the long run.
upvoted 0 times
...
Major
3 months ago
Option D is definitely the best choice. It will make managing the test suite a lot easier.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77