Which statement best summarises how a modernisation team should respond to validation failures on transformed code?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Validation failures tell you where the transformed code broke the legacy logic. Fix the code, not the tests, and don’t ignore rare cases—correct behavior is the goal.
Full Explanation
The correct approach is to use each validation failure to diagnose the transformation issue behind it and fix the generated code so it preserves the intended business logic, regardless of how often the affected case occurs. Every failure exists to be investigated and fixed at the code level so that behaviour, including on rare and edge cases, matches the legacy program's intent.
Adjusting tests, tolerances, or requirements so the validation suite reports success is incorrect because changing the measuring instrument to agree with a wrong result does not make the result right.
Prioritising only failures on commonly used business cases and deferring the rest indefinitely is incorrect because frequency in production is not a proxy for how much a defect matters when it does occur.
Treating a passing validation run as the goal, however it is achieved, is incorrect because a passing run achieved by any means gives false confidence rather than genuine assurance.
For the exam, the objective is a transformed application that behaves correctly, and validation failures are the path to that, not an obstacle to be cleared.