Software engineering — modular design quality: Which of the following best measures how good or bad a module's design is?

Introduction / Context:
Modular design aims to build software as a set of well-structured, maintainable modules. Two foundational quality measures are cohesion (often called module strength) and coupling (the degree of interdependence). This question asks which measures evaluate modular design quality.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Cohesion reflects how strongly responsibilities within a module relate to each other.
• Coupling reflects how much a module depends on other modules.
• Static analysis is a technique that can help compute or infer metrics, but it is not itself a design quality metric.

Concept / Approach:

High cohesion and low coupling are widely accepted goals. Measuring cohesion and coupling gives actionable insight: high cohesion suggests focused, understandable modules; low coupling reduces ripple effects of change and eases testing. Combining both yields a balanced picture of design quality.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Textbook guidelines (e.g., structured design, object-oriented design) consistently emphasize maximizing cohesion and minimizing coupling as core design principles, validating the combined use of these measures.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Module strength only: Incomplete—ignores coupling effects.
• Module coupling only: Incomplete—ignores internal focus of cohesion.
• Static analysis only: A method, not a design quality metric.
• None of the above: Incorrect because the pair of metrics is correct.

Common Pitfalls:

Optimizing one metric at the expense of the other; for example, extremely high cohesion with hidden tight coupling through global state. Also, assuming cohesion can be perfectly quantified—often qualitative judgment is required.

Final Answer:

Both module strength and module coupling