What process involves programmers, not part of the original development team, checking the logic of an algorithm?

The process where programmers, who were not part of the original development team, check the logic of an algorithm is referred to as peer checking. This method promotes collaborative quality control by having individuals with fresh perspectives and potentially different skill sets evaluate the work done by their colleagues.

Peer checking is valuable because it allows for an assessment of the algorithm’s logic and helps identify any overlooked errors, inefficiencies, or potential improvements. This practice can enhance the overall quality of the software by leveraging the insights of programmers who might think differently about the solution due to their diverse experiences and viewpoints.

In contrast, code review typically involves a structured process where code is reviewed within the same team or by designated reviewers, focusing more on adherence to coding standards and best practices. Static analysis involves using tools to analyze code without executing it, focusing on potential vulnerabilities and efficiency rather than the logic of algorithms specifically. Quality assurance encompasses broader testing and validation processes aimed at ensuring the overall quality of the software, including testing, but is not specifically focused on algorithm logic checks by unrelated programmers.