Development Cost Comparison
Errors Found Number Cost Unit Total
|
|
Reviews conducted
|
|
|
During design
|
22
|
1.5
|
33
|
|
Before test
|
36
|
6.5
|
234
|
|
During test
|
15
|
15
|
315
|
|
After release
|
3
|
67
|
201
|
|
|
|
|
783
|
|
|
No Reviews Conducted
|
|
|
|
Before test
|
22
|
6.5
|
143
|
|
During test
|
82
|
15
|
1230
|
|
After release
|
12
|
67
|
804
|
|
|
|
|
2177
|
Table - Development cost comparison
(1) to Cover errors in function logic or implies for any representation of the software;
(2) to verify which of the software under review meets its needs
(3) to sure that the software has been published according to predefined standards;
(4) to achieve software which is established in a uniform manner; and
(5) to make projects more manageable. In addition the FTR gives as a design, training ground, enabling junior engineers to observe several approaches to software analysis, and implementation. The FTR also serves to promote backup and continuity and continuity backup because a number of people become familiar with categories of the software which they may not have otherwise seen.
The FTR is normally a class of reviews which include walk by inspections, round-robin reviews and other short group technical assessments of software. Each ETR is conducted as a meeting and will be successful only if it is properly controlled planned, and attended. In the paragraphs which, follow, guidelines same to those for a walkthrough [ERE90], [GIL 93] are presented as a preventative formal technical review.