Reviewing the proposed refactoring sequence, the design team wants to confirm it matches the assistant's recommended workflow for refactoring a mainframe application into modular components.
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
You analyze the application first, then select candidate components, review the suggestions, and only then generate the modular code. Generating first has nothing to check itself against.
Full Explanation
The correct workflow is the sequence that analyzes the application, selects candidate components, reviews the suggestions, and then generates the modular code. Each stage builds on the last: analysis of the existing application informs which components are sensible candidates, review of those candidate recommendations catches problems before code exists, and generation follows only once the boundaries are sound.
Generating the modular components first and then deciding afterwards which parts of the application they should correspond to is incorrect because generating code before deciding what it should represent produces components with no grounding in the actual application structure.
Selecting components based on team preference and skipping analysis of the existing application entirely is incorrect because skipping analysis means component boundaries are chosen without evidence of how the application actually works.
Reviewing only the components that fail in production and generating replacements for those alone is incorrect because reacting only to production failures is not a refactoring workflow, and it misses everything that has not yet failed.
For the exam, expect the sequence analyze, select, review, generate to be tested directly.