Dynamic testing involves executing software with input values and examining the output, allowing defects to be detected in code. Static testing analyzes software work products like documentation without executing the code. Formal reviews have defined phases including planning, preparation where reviewers check materials, a review meeting, and follow-up on rework. The main review types are walkthroughs where the author guides discussion, technical reviews where experts focus on technical content, and inspections with more formal defect identification. Critical success factors for implementing reviews include designating a champion, focusing on important items, explicit planning and tracking, training participants, managing people issues, and continuously improving.

1. Program Studi S1 Sistem Informasi
Fakultas Sains dan Teknologi
Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau

2. The definition of testing outlines objectives that relate to evaluation, revealing
defects and quality. As indicated in the definition two approaches can be used to achieve
these objectives, static testing and dynamic testing.
With dynamic testing methods, software is executed using a set of input values
and its output is then examined and compared to what is expected. During static testing,
software work products are examined manually, or with a set of tools, but not executed.
As a consequence, dynamic testing can only be applied to software code. Dynamic
execution is applied as a technique to detect defects and to determine quality attributes of
the code.

3. 1
Phases of
a formal
review
Planning
Kick-off
Preparation
Review
Meeting
Rework
Follow-up

4. 2
• The moderator (or review leader) leads the review
process. He or she determines, in co operation with the
author, the type of review, approach and the composition of
the review team. The moderator performs the entry check
and the follow-up on the rework, in order to control the
quality of the input and output of the review process.
• As the writer of the document under review, the
author's basic goal should be to learn as much as possible
with regard to improving the quality of the document, but
also to improve his or her ability to write future documents.

5. • During the logging meeting, the scribe (or recorder)
has to record each defect mentioned and any suggestions
for process improvement. In practice it is often the author
who plays this role, ensuring that the log is readable and
understandable.
• The task of the reviewers (also called checkers or
inspectors) is to check any material for defects, mostly prior
to the meeting. The level of thoroughness required depends
on the type of review.
• The manager is involved in the reviews as he or she
decides on the execution of reviews, allocates time in
project schedules and determines whether review process
objectives have been met. The manager will also take care of
any review training requested by the participants

6. 3
Walkthrough
Technical
Review
Inspection

7. A walkthrough is characterized by the author of the document under review guiding
the participants through the document and his or her thought processes, to achieve
a common understanding and to gather feedback. This is especially useful if people
from outside the software discipline are present, who are not used to, or cannot
easily understand software development documents. The content of the document is
explained step by step by the author, to reach consensus on changes or to gather
information.

8. A technical review is a discussion meeting that focuses on achieving consensus
about the technical content of a document. Compared to inspections, technical
reviews are less formal and there is little or no focus on defect identification on the
basis of referenced documents, intended readership and rules. During technical
reviews defects are found by experts, who focus on the content of the document.
The experts that are needed for a technical review are, for example, architects, chief
designers and key users. In practice, technical reviews vary from quite informal to
very formal.

9. A technical review is a discussion meeting that focuses on achieving consensus
about the technical content of a document. Compared to inspections, technical
reviews are less formal and there is little or no focus on defect identification on the
basis of referenced documents, intended readership and rules. During technical
reviews defects are found by experts, who focus on the content of the document.
The experts that are needed for a technical review are, for example, architects, chief
designers and key users. In practice, technical reviews vary from quite informal to
very formal.

10. 4
Implementing (formal) reviews is not easy as there is no one way to
success and there are numerous ways to fail. The next list contains
a number of critical success factors that improve the chances of
success when implementing reviews.
Find a 'champion'
Pick things that really count
Explicitly plan and track review activities
Train participants

11. Manage people issues
Follow the rules but keep it simple
Continuously improve process and tools
Report results