Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

ASTQB Exam - Topic 2 Question 87 Discussion

You are testing a native application for a smart phone. The application allows the user to make grocery lists on the phone and store up to three lists at a time. A list can contain up to 50 items.Which of the following is the minimum set of test conditions to achieve 100% coverage with the equivalence partitioning test technique?
C) List with 0 items, List with 25 items, List with 51 items, 3 lists saved
A) List with 47 items
B) List with 0 items, List with 1 item, List with 50 items, List with 51 items, 0 lists saved, 1 list saved, 3 lists saved, 4 lists saved
D) List with 0 items, List with 12 item, List with 58 items, 0 lists saved, 1 list saved, 3 lists saved, 7 lists saved

ASTQB Exam - Topic 2 Question 87 Discussion

Actual exam question for ASTQB's ASTQB exam
Question #: 87
Topic #: 2
[All ASTQB Questions]

You are testing a native application for a smart phone. The application allows the user to make grocery lists on the phone and store up to three lists at a time. A list can contain up to 50 items.

Which of the following is the minimum set of test conditions to achieve 100% coverage with the equivalence partitioning test technique?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Clarinda at Feb 09, 2025, 06:02 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ASTQB Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Vivan
8 months ago
Not sure if 51 items is a valid test case, seems odd.
upvoted 0 times
...
Felix
8 months ago
Wait, can you really save more than 3 lists?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lemuel
8 months ago
D has too many unnecessary items, though.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leota
9 months ago
I think C is missing some key cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tambra
9 months ago
Option B covers all scenarios needed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carmen
9 months ago
I'm leaning towards option C, but I wonder if it really captures all the necessary scenarios for both items and lists saved.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gwenn
9 months ago
I feel like I might have seen a question like this before, but I can't recall if we needed to test for lists over the maximum limit as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jose
10 months ago
I think option B looks familiar because it includes both the limits for items in a list and the limits for saved lists. That seems comprehensive.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delila
10 months ago
I remember we discussed equivalence partitioning in class, but I'm not sure if I covered all the edge cases for the lists saved.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annamaria
10 months ago
I'm a bit confused about the "minimum set" part. Do we need to include all the boundary values, or can we just pick a few to cover the different partitions?
upvoted 0 times
...
Eleonore
10 months ago
Yeah, that makes sense. I'd go with option B - it seems to cover the key partitions around the number of items and number of lists.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jovita
10 months ago
Good point, Sarah. I think the key is to identify the minimum set of test conditions that would cover all the equivalence classes. So we don't necessarily need to test every single boundary value, as long as we cover the different partitions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gregg
1 year ago
B is the answer, no doubt. Anything less and you're just asking for trouble. Though I do wonder if the developers were high when they decided on the 3-list limit. Must be some serious grocery hauls going on!
upvoted 0 times
...
Pete
1 year ago
I'm thinking option C is the way to go. Why test for 51 items when the max is 50? And 7 lists saved? That's just overkill.
upvoted 0 times
Alyce
1 year ago
Testing for 7 saved lists is unnecessary.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janna
1 year ago
Exactly, we should prioritize testing the valid ranges and limits.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maile
1 year ago
Yeah, testing for 51 items doesn't make sense when the max is 50.
upvoted 0 times
...
Denae
1 year ago
Exactly, we should focus on the valid ranges.
upvoted 0 times
...
Louvenia
1 year ago
I agree, testing for 51 items doesn't make sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Linette
1 year ago
I agree, option C seems more focused on the relevant test conditions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Susana
1 year ago
Option C seems like the most efficient choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sharee
1 year ago
Option B for sure! Gotta test those extremes, you know? Can't have any 'oops, my app crashed because I tried to save 4 lists' moments.
upvoted 0 times
Angelica
1 year ago
Let's go with Option B then, it seems like the most comprehensive choice for testing the app.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anika
1 year ago
Option B covers all the necessary test conditions to achieve 100% coverage with equivalence partitioning.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ryann
1 year ago
Definitely, we need to make sure the app can handle saving different numbers of lists and items.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buddy
1 year ago
I agree, testing the extremes is important to ensure the app can handle all scenarios.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ariel
1 year ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'd go with option B - it seems to cover all the edge cases, including the valid range of list items and the max number of saved lists.
upvoted 0 times
Margarett
1 year ago
I agree, option B seems like the best choice for achieving 100% coverage.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tarra
1 year ago
I think option B covers all the necessary test conditions.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Madelyn
1 year ago
That's a valid point, but I still think option B provides more comprehensive coverage.
upvoted 0 times
...
Myrtie
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe option C covers the key scenarios without unnecessary duplication.
upvoted 0 times
...
Madelyn
1 year ago
I think the minimum set of test conditions should cover all possible scenarios, so I would go with option B.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel