New Year Sale 2026! 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

Microsoft GH-300 Exam - Topic 3 Question 3 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's GH-300 exam
Question #: 3
Topic #: 3
[All GH-300 Questions]

Why is code reviewing still necessary when using GitHub Copilot to write tests?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Code review is necessary because GitHub Copilot's generated test cases might not cover all possible scenarios, especially edge cases and complex interactions.


by Joanna at Aug 16, 2025, 09:03 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium GH-300 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Gail
3 months ago
Copilot is helpful, but it’s not perfect.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ming
3 months ago
Wait, does Copilot really cover everything? I'm not so sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerry
3 months ago
Totally agree, can't rely solely on AI for testing!
upvoted 0 times
...
Trinidad
3 months ago
Manual testing is still a must, no doubt about it!
upvoted 0 times
...
Eric
3 months ago
Code reviews catch edge cases that Copilot might miss.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desiree
4 months ago
I think I read somewhere that even AI-generated tests need to be reviewed to ensure quality. So, C sounds right to me!
upvoted 0 times
...
Leonard
4 months ago
I thought Copilot was supposed to be really good, but I guess it can't replace the need for human oversight. So, D seems wrong.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rhea
4 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like we practiced a question about the limitations of AI in generating tests. Maybe that's related to this?
upvoted 0 times
...
Raul
4 months ago
I remember discussing how Copilot can miss edge cases, so I think option C makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elena
4 months ago
Wait, does this mean Copilot can't replace manual testing? I'm not sure I follow the logic on that one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marget
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got it. The key here is that Copilot's generated test cases may not cover everything, so code reviewing is still necessary.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kiley
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused. I thought Copilot was supposed to generate the best code, but this question is making me doubt that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Merilyn
5 months ago
This is a tricky one. I'm not sure if GitHub Copilot can really cover all possible scenarios in test cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Toi
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure Copilot can ever replace human judgment. Option C is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aja
7 months ago
I agree with Alisha. Copilot is a powerful tool, but it's not a substitute for careful code review and testing.
upvoted 0 times
Willard
5 months ago
I agree, Copilot can be helpful but it's important to double check for any missed scenarios.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorethea
6 months ago
I think C is the correct answer. We still need to review the test cases generated by Copilot to ensure all scenarios are covered.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Alisha
7 months ago
Option C is clearly the right answer. GitHub Copilot is great, but it can't predict every possible scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Trina
7 months ago
I think code reviewing is still necessary because GitHub Copilot may not cover all scenarios.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel