Which three statements are advantages of using Spring's Dependency Injection? (Choose three.)

Question

Options

• ADependency injection can make code easier to trace because it couples behavior with
• BDependency injection reduces the start-up time of an application.
• CDependencies between application components can be managed external to the components.
• DConfiguration can be externalized and centralized in a small set of files.
• EDependency injection creates tight coupling between components.
• FDependency injection facilitates loose coupling between components.

• A
  5% (2)
• B
  2% (1)
• C
  91% (39)
• E
  2% (1)

Explanation

Spring's Dependency Injection (DI) is correct for C, D, and F because DI externalizes the wiring of components so that dependencies are declared and managed outside the components themselves (C), configuration can live in XML, YAML, or annotation-based files separate from business logic (D), and components depend on abstractions rather than concrete implementations, producing loose coupling (F).

Why the distractors fail:

• A is backwards - DI actually decouples behavior, making traces harder, not easier, because call paths flow through the container rather than direct instantiation.
• B is false - DI typically increases startup time because the container must scan, wire, and initialize all beans at boot.
• E is the exact opposite of DI's purpose; tight coupling is what DI is designed to eliminate.

Memory tip: Think of DI as a "restaurant menu" model - the kitchen (container) manages ingredient sourcing (C) from a centralized recipe book (D), and your dish doesn't care which farm grew the vegetables, only that they arrive (loose coupling = F). Any answer implying DI makes things harder to follow or slower to start is a trap.

No community discussion yet for this question.