LEARN. PRACTICE. GROW.Concept and mechanism
Static testing examines work products such as requirements, code, models, and test cases without executing the software under test. Human review can identify contradictions and missing information; a static-analysis tool applies specific checks. Neither automatically demonstrates actual behavior under load or user acceptance. Reviews can have different formality levels. In a structured review, clarify objective and scope, prepare participants, collect observations, analyze issues, and follow up corrections. The focus is improving the work product, not appraising the person who wrote it.
Guided application
When a requirement asks for a file “quickly” or “at end of day,” ask which event starts measurement, when it ends, and which calendar applies. Use normal and exceptional examples to expose different interpretations. Record the decision and update the criteria that tests will use. Comments should identify a concrete gap and its effect. Individual preparation avoids spending the whole meeting on a first reading and allows different perspectives to contribute useful questions.
Business expects the report published at 18:00; development thinks the job should start at 18:00. Review can resolve the difference before code exists.
Common pitfalls
Turning review into personal judgment; approving without preparation; treating absence of static warnings as proof of no failures.
Related topics: Design cases and measure coverage · Risk, defects, and release decisions
Clarify observable criteria early and retain dynamic testing appropriate to risk.
Reference: ISTQB CTFL syllabus v4.0.1 · CTFL v4.0; syllabus v4.0.1 (2024-09-15)