Structured programming fundamentals: Which option best describes what structured programming involves for building reliable software?

Introduction / Context:
Structured programming is a foundational discipline that improves program clarity and correctness. It emphasizes composing software from small, cohesive modules and using well-defined control structures rather than arbitrary jumps. The result is code that is easier to reason about, test, and maintain.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The goal is reliable, maintainable software.
• Teams need to localize changes and defects.
• Control flow should be explicit and limited to sequence, selection, and iteration.

Concept / Approach:
Functional modularization groups related behavior into procedures or functions with single, clear responsibilities. Each module hides internal details and exposes a simple interface. Control logic is built with structured constructs (if/else, case, while/for) rather than unrestrained GOTO. This improves testability because modules can be unit-tested, and errors are localized to specific components, accelerating debugging and reducing regression risk.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Code reviews, cyclomatic complexity checks, and successful unit tests confirm modular design and structured control flow. Maintenance metrics (defect density, mean time to repair) typically improve under structured practices.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Decentralization across unrelated teams risks inconsistency; it is an org design choice, not a programming principle.
• Unrestricted GOTO harms clarity and testability.
• Single undocumented files contradict modularization and quality control.

Common Pitfalls:
Creating modules that are too large (low cohesion) or overly dependent (high coupling). Overusing shared globals undermines modular benefits.

Final Answer:
Functional modularization with clear control structures