Part 3 "Bonus Program" During code reviews, it is the author's responsibility... 1 credit [K2]

Question

Options

• Ato address all major and minor defects as stated in the defect log
• Bto fix all major and minor defects as stated in the defect log
• Cto take action on only improvement suggestions from the defect log
• Dto correct source documents that have major defects

• A
  94% (17)
• C
  6% (1)

Explanation

Option A is correct because during a code review, the author is responsible for addressing - not necessarily fixing - all defects (both major and minor) logged in the defect log. "Addressing" means deciding on an appropriate action for each item, which could include fixing, deferring, or rejecting with justification; it does not mean the author must personally resolve every single one.

Option B is wrong because "fix" implies mandatory correction of every defect, whereas the author's role is to respond to and act on defects, not unconditionally repair all of them. Option C is wrong because it restricts responsibility to improvement suggestions only, ignoring actual major and minor defects - the author must engage with all logged items. Option D is wrong because it arbitrarily limits scope to only major defects and only source documents, excluding minor defects and other artifact types.

Memory tip: Think "A = Address = Action required on ALL" - the author must take some action on every item in the log (major or minor), but "address" is broader and less absolute than "fix."

No community discussion yet for this question.