InsuranceSuite-Developer Associate Certification - InsuranceSuite Developer - Mammoth Proctored Exam Questions and Answers

When extending the Guidewire Data Model with a brand-new concept—in this case, a "Renter"—developers must adhere to specific naming and architectural standards. Because the "Renter" entity does not exist in the base product, it must be created as a new entity definition.

According to Guidewire best practices for new entities, the file must be created with the.eti (Entity Interface)extension and placed in the Extensions -> Entity folder. Furthermore, to ensure "Upgrade-Safety" and avoid collisions with future Guidewire product updates, the entity name must include the_Extsuffix. Therefore, the file should be named Renter_Ext.eti (Option D).

Within this new entity, the developer needs to reference the existing EmploymentStatusType typelist. In Guidewire, a field that links to a typelist is defined as atypekey. Since the field name itself is specific to this new custom entity, the field name EmploymentStatus is appropriate. It is important to note that while some older practices suggested suffixing thecolumn namewith _Ext, the primary mandatory best practice for cloud-ready development focuses on theEntity nameandTypelist namesuffixes.

Other options are incorrect for the following reasons:

Option A:Uses .etx, which is for extending anexistingbase entity, not creating a new one.

Option B:Uses a .etl extension, which is not a valid Guidewire metadata extension for entity definition.

Option C:Suggests modifying the typelist logic (adding a code "Renter") which does not address the need to create a new "Renter" entity with an employment field. Option D represents the most complete and architecturally sound approach to meeting the business requirement.

In theGuidewire InsuranceSuite Developer Fundamentalscourse, logging best practices are strictly tied to two primary concerns:Security (PII protection)andTroubleshooting Efficiency.

Option A is the correct choice because it providescontextual, structured datawithout revealing sensitive information. It includes the method name (createClaim) and the unique database identifier (PublicID). Using the PublicID is the gold standard in Guidewire development because it allows developers to look up the exact record in the database or the UI without loggingPersonally Identifiable Information (PII). This ensures compliance with data privacy regulations like GDPR and CCPA.

In contrast, Options B and C are significant security violations. Option B logs a name and a driver's license number, while Option C logs a name, email address, and vehicle details. These are all considered PII and should never appear in clear text in application logs. Option D is poor practice because it is "noisy" and lacks specific context (like a claim number or timestamp) that would help a developer determinewhichattempt failed, and the use of "ERROR!" with an exclamation mark is non-standard for system logs. Structured logging, as seen in Option A, allows automated tools like Datadog to parse the logs more effectively.

In the Guidewire InsuranceSuite framework, maintaining the integrity of the base configuration is paramount for ensuring a smooth upgrade path. This is achieved through a strict "extension-only" philosophy for out-of-the-box (OOTB) components. When a developer needs to modify a base typelist—like EmployeeAddress—they must understand the distinction between.tti (Typelist Interface)files and.ttx (Typelist Extension)files.

A .tti file defines the original structure and initial typecodes of a typelist. These files are considered "base" and should never be edited directly (making Option C incorrect). If a developer were to modify the base .tti, those changes would be overwritten during the next platform update. To safely add a new typecode to an existing base typelist, Guidewire requires the creation of a .ttx file with the exact same name as the base typelist (e.g., EmployeeAddress.ttx). This extension file tells the Guidewire metadata engine to merge the new entries with the existing ones at runtime.

Furthermore, Guidewire best practices for metadata extensions require specific naming conventions to prevent future "namespace collisions." While the .ttx file itself adopts the base name, the newtypecodeadded within that file should be suffixed with _Ext (e.g., alternate_Ext). This ensures that if Guidewire later releases a product update that adds an "alternate" code to the base EmployeeAddress typelist, the customer's custom code remains unique and does not conflict with the new base code.

Option B is incorrect because you do not create a new .tti with an _Ext suffix for an existing list. Option E is incorrect because .tix is not a valid Guidewire metadata file extension; the correct extension is .ttx. Therefore, Option D is the only choice that follows the correct file creation and naming convention protocols required by the Guidewire development lifecycle.

In Guidewire PCF (Page Configuration Framework) development, the selection of the correct widget is driven by the underlying data relationship. In this scenario, a "Reference" is a separate entity, and an Account (or Contact) is likely to have multiple instances of these references (a one-to-many relationship). According to Guidewire best practices, when you need to display a collection of objects—especially when that collection can vary in size or requires the user to see multiple entries at once—theList View (LV)is the standard and most efficient UI component.

AList Viewprovides a tabular format that allows users to view, sort, and sometimes edit multiple records simultaneously. By creating a ReferenceLV.pcf and embedding it into the ContactSummary.pcf (typically via a PanelRef), the developer provides a clean, scalable interface. This approach is superior to aDetail View (DV)because a DV is designed for a single record's specific fields; attempting to hard-code "three references" into a DV (Option A) is fragile and non-scalable if the business requirement later changes to four or five references.

Furthermore, embedding the List View directly on the Summary page ensures that the information is immediately visible to the user ("at a glance"), which aligns with the purpose of a "Summary" page. Using aPopup(Option B) adds unnecessary clicks to the user workflow, and anInput Set(Option D) is generally intended for grouping related input fields within a Detail View rather than managing a collection of entity instances. By utilizing the List View, the developer follows the architectural pattern of "Master-Detail" or "List-Detail" commonly found throughout the InsuranceSuite applications, ensuring the UI remains consistent with the rest of the Guidewire platform.

In the GuidewirePage Configuration Framework (PCF), displaying a list of data within aDetail View (DV)requires specific container widgets. When a developer uses aListViewInputto embed an existing List View into a form, they are essentially creating an "editable grid" section.

1. The Requirement for a Toolbar (Option A)

According to theInsuranceSuite Developer Fundamentalsguide, a ListViewInput is a specialized widget that acts as a wrapper for a List View. Unlike a standard List View displayed on its own page (which inherits the page's toolbar), a ListViewInput exists inside a Detail View column. For the list to be interactive—allowing users to add new bank accounts or remove existing ones—the ListViewInputmust have its own Toolbar. In Guidewire Studio, if a ListViewInput is marked as editable but lacks a toolbar, the metadata validator will flag an error because there is no container to hold the necessary action buttons.

2. Configuring Iterator Buttons (Option B)

Once the Toolbar is added to the ListViewInput, it remains empty untilIterator Buttonsare placed inside it. These buttons (typically the "Add" and "Remove" buttons) must be explicitly configured to point to theRow Iteratordefined within the referenced List View PCF.

The error in the screenshot is resolved by:

Selecting the ListViewInput in the PCF tree.

Adding aToolbarchild widget.

AddingIterator Buttons(Add/Remove) to that toolbar.

Linking those buttons to the correct iterator ID.

This combination provides the end-user with the UI controls needed to manipulate the banking information array. Options C and D represent alternative ways to structure the UI but do not address the specific configuration error of the ListViewInput widget. Option E relates to security and runtime behavior, not the structural metadata requirements of the PCF layout engine.

In theGuidewire System Health & Qualitymodules, the focus is on scaling automated testing usingGUnit. When a developer has a large number of tests, running them individually is inefficient. To group tests logically and execute them as a batch—often as part of a CI/CD pipeline in TeamCity—Guidewire utilizesTest Suites.

To group multiple test classes into a single suite (Option E), they must share the same @Suite annotation. This annotation tells the GUnit runner that these classes are part of a specific collection, such as a "Smoke Test Suite" or a "Financials Logic Suite." This allows for structured execution and reporting across the entire implementation.

Additionally, for tests to run together effectively and share a consistent environment, they typicallymust be based on the same GUnit base class(Option A). In Guidewire, base classes like GWTestBase or custom insurer-specific base classes provide the necessary "scaffolding"—such as database connection handling, bundle management, and authentication—required for the tests to run within the InsuranceSuite framework. Without a shared base class, individual tests might attempt to initialize the system in conflicting ways, leading to "flaky" tests or execution failures.

Options B and C are incorrect because the goal of a suite is to groupdifferentclasses, and properties like TestResultsDir are usually handled by the build runner (TeamCity) rather than the individual test code. Option D is a specific assertion method and has no bearing on how tests are grouped or executed in parallel.

TheGuidewire Page Configuration Framework (PCF)follows a strict nesting hierarchy to ensure that the layout engine can correctly render widgets on the screen. According to theInsuranceSuite Developer Fundamentalscurriculum, specifically the lesson on "Container Widget Usage," developers must understand the parent-child relationships required for different layout styles.

ACardwidget is a component of aCardViewPanel, used to create tabbed interfaces within a page. However, a Card itself cannot directly host anInput Column. Instead, a Card serves as a container for other panels. To display data fields in the standard column-based layout favored by InsuranceSuite, aDetailViewPanel(commonly referred to simply as aDetail Viewin the Studio palette) must be placed inside the Card.

TheDetail Viewacts as the intermediate container that establishes the data context (the row or entity being edited) and provides the grid system necessary for theInput Column. The Input Column, in turn, allows developers to align fields vertically. Without the Detail View container, the PCF would be syntactically invalid because the layout engine requires the Detail View to manage the labels and input alignment for any child columns.

Option A is incorrect because a "PCF File" is the entire document, not a widget added to a tree. Option C (List View) is used for tabular data, not column-based input layouts. Option D (Input Set) is a grouping mechanism that sitsinsideoralongsidean Input Column but cannot serve as the parent to one. Therefore, adding aDetail View(B) is the correct and necessary step to bridge the hierarchy between the Card and its Input Columns.

TheCloud Assuranceprocess is a specialized quality framework designed by Guidewire to ensure that any project destined for theGuidewire Cloud Platform (GWCP)meets the necessary standards for security, stability, and "upgrade-ability." This process involves a series of reviews and checkpoints where Guidewire experts evaluate the customer's configuration and integration code.

Cloud Assurance is specifically mandatory for projects moving onto the Guidewire Cloud. This includesNew Guidewire Cloud Platform implementations(Option B), where a customer is building their environment on GWCP for the first time. It also applies toUpgrades to Guidewire Cloud Platform(Option A), which occurs when a customer currently running an older version of InsuranceSuite on-premises (self-managed) chooses to migrate and upgrade their application into the cloud environment.

The process is vital because cloud-based applications share infrastructure and follow a "Continuous Delivery" model where Guidewire manages the underlying platform. To prevent one customer's inefficient code from impacting the shared cloud environment or blocking future platform updates, the Cloud Assurance team verifies that the project adheres to "Cloud Delivery Standards" (such as avoiding prohibited Gosu APIs or ensuring correct naming conventions).

Options C and D are incorrect becauseself-managed (on-premises)implementations are managed by the customer or a third-party partner; while Guidewire provides best practices, the formal Cloud Assurance gatekeeping process is not a prerequisite for these non-cloud deployments. Option E is a part of ongoing maintenance that may be subject to internal quality gates, but the "Cloud Assurance" process as defined in the training refers to the major project milestones of implementation and migration/upgrade to the cloud.

In Guidewire InsuranceSuite configuration,Validation Expressions(found in the Data Model within entity properties or specialized validation files) follow a specific logic: they must returnnullif the data is valid, and anon-null value(typically a String representing the error message) if the data is invalid. This is a common point of confusion for developers used to standard Boolean logic where "true" means valid.

In this scenario, the helper method validatePostalCode returns aBoolean(true for valid, false for invalid). Because Guidewire expects a null result for success, a direct call to a Boolean method is insufficient.

Option A and Care incorrect because they evaluate to a Boolean value (true or false). If the method returns true, the validation engine receives true instead of null, which it incorrectly interprets as a validation failure.

Option Bis syntactically incorrect as it compares a Boolean to null.

Option Duses the ternary operator to map the Boolean result to the expected Guidewire logic. If validatePostalCode is true (valid), the expression returns null, which the system treats as "no error found." If the method is false (invalid), it returns a non-null value (in this exam wording, false). Since false is not null, the Guidewire validation engine identifies this as a failure and prevents the data from being committed or advancing to the next stage.

While best practices in a production environment suggest returning a descriptiveStringfor the user (e.g., "Invalid postal code for this country"), for the purposes of the developer exam, the logic focuses on theNull/Non-Nullrequirement. This mechanism ensures that developers understand how the Guidewire validation framework triggers errors based on the presence of a return value rather than a Boolean state.

Guidewire emphasizes a strict naming and packaging convention for custom Gosu classes and enhancements to ensure code clarity and to prevent "namespace collisions" during platform upgrades. For a customer like "Succeed Insurance," the best practice is to use a unique prefix for the package structure, typically derived from the company's initials and the specific application.

In this case,"si.pc"(Succeed Insurance PolicyCenter) is the appropriate starting point for the package. Placing enhancements in a sub-package like"enhancements.entity"(Option B) logically organizes the code by its function, separating entity logic from other business rules or integration classes. This structure ensures that developers can easily locate custom logic added to both base entities and custom entities like AuditMethod_Ext.

Regarding the function name, Guidewire best practices for enhancements dictate that custom methods added to an entity should include the_Extsuffix (e.g., determineAuditType_Ext()). This is crucial because if Guidewire later releases a product update that adds a method with the same name (determineAuditType) to the base entity, the customer's version will not conflict with the base version.

Options C and D use the gw namespace, which is strictly reserved for Guidewire's internal "Out of the Box" code. Using the gw package for custom code can lead to severe compilation errors or unexpected behavior during upgrades, as the Guidewire platform assumes total ownership of that namespace. Therefore, utilizing the insurer's unique package prefix combined with the _Ext suffix on the method is the only approach that aligns with Guidewire's certification standards and long-term maintenance requirements.

When managingTypelists(Guidewire’s version of enumerations) in a Cloud-compliant environment, there is a distinct difference between adding codes to an existing typelist and creating an entirely new one.

According to theInsuranceSuite Developer Fundamentalscurriculum, if you are adding a new code to anexistingtypelist that is already an extension (indicated by the .ttx file extension), you simply add the new code to that existing .ttx file.

One of the most common points of confusion is the use of the _Ext suffix. Whilenew entitiesandnew typelistsrequire the _Ext suffix to follow Cloud Delivery Standards,individual typecodes(the values within the list) generally donotrequire the suffix unless the specific project guidelines demand it for every single metadata element. In standard Guidewire practice, a typecode named reinsurer (Option B) is sufficient and cleaner.

Option C is incorrect because you should not create multiple .ttx files for the same typelist; you should consolidate extensions into the existing one. Option D is incorrect because it suggests creating a whole new list rather than modifying the existing one. Option A is less ideal because adding _Ext to individual codes within a list is not a mandatory platform requirement and can make logic like TC_REINSURER_EXT cumbersome to write in Gosu.

When dealing with alarge fleet of vehicles, performance is the primary concern. Retrieving thousands of vehicle records and filtering them in the application server's memory (Options E and F) is a high-risk anti-pattern that leads to latency and high memory consumption.

The best practice for implementing efficient UI filters on large datasets is to useGosu Standard Query Filters(Option C). These filters are added to the ListView's toolbar. When a user selects a filter (e.g., "Only Heavy Trucks"), the Guidewire platform translates that filter into a SQL WHERE clause. This allows thedatabaseto do the work, returning only the specific subset of vehicles requested. This "Database-First" approach ensures that the application server remains responsive and that the network traffic between the database and the application is kept to a minimum.

Option A (filtering on the Row Iterator) and Option B (using "visible" properties) still require the system to fetch all the data from the database first, which does not solve the underlying performance issue. Using Query Filters is the only scalable solution for InsuranceSuite applications managing high-volume data.

For standard formatting requirements like phone numbers, ZIP codes, or email addresses, Guidewire recommendsField-Level Validation(Option C). This is implemented using the validationExpression property on the PCF widget or, more ideally, by associating aValidatorin the Data Model (.eti/.etx).

Field-level validation provides the best user experience because it triggers immediately when the user navigates away from the field (client-side or AJAX refresh), providing instant feedback. Using aValidation Rule(D) is a "heavier" server-side operation that only triggers when the user tries to save the entire page. By using a Regex-based validator at the field level, the application maintains data integrity with minimal performance overhead.

In Guidewire development, code organization is paramount for maintainability and scalability. According to the Gosu best practices taught in theInsuranceSuite Developer Fundamentalscourse, UI-related logic should be separated from the visual definition of the page. While PCF files have a "Code" tab, placing extensive logic there (Option E) is considered a "coding anti-pattern." Instead, developers should createUI helper classes(Option A). This separation of concerns allows for easier unit testing of the logic and ensures that the PCF files remain focused on UI layout and widget configuration.

Furthermore, when introducing custom architectural components likeinterfaces, developers must manage namespaces correctly to ensure upgrade safety. If a developer creates a new interface within a dedicated customer package—such as si.insurance.util—Guidewire best practices (Option D) state that the _Ext suffix is not strictly required on the interface name itself because the package name already distinguishes it as a custom component. This differs from entity extensions where the suffix is mandatory because entities share a global namespace.

Options B and F violate standard Gosu naming conventions. Gosu methods should uselower camelCase(e.g., modifyAddressInformation), and while Impl is a common Java pattern, Guidewire prefers more descriptive naming or standard package-based organization. Option C is incorrect because entities should ideally contain business logic related to the data itself, not specific UI state or manipulation logic, which is better handled in helper classes.

In Guidewire InsuranceSuite development, one of the most critical performance principles is "database-first" processing. When using the GosuQuery API, developers have two ways to manipulate data: at theDatabase level(via the Query object) or at theApplication Server level(via the Result/Collection object).

Methods like sortBy() and firstWhere() are part of the Gosu collection library. When applied to a query result, these methods trigger the execution of the SQL query, fetchallmatching records from the database into the application server's memory, and then perform the sorting and filtering in the Java/Gosu heap. This is a significant anti-pattern because it consumes excessive memory and CPU cycles on the application server, especially if the underlying table (like Activity) contains thousands or millions of rows.

According to best practices, the developer should handle filtering and sortingin the database(Option C). This is achieved by using the compare() and orderBy() methods directly on the Query object before calling .select(). By doing so, Guidewire generates a SQL statement with a WHERE clause for filtering and an ORDER BY clause for sorting. The database engine, which is highly optimized for these operations, then returns only the specific record needed. For the "first" record requirement, the developer should combine the database-level orderBy() with a getFirstResult() call on the result set. This ensures that only the minimal required data is transferred over the network and loaded into memory, maintaining high application throughput and preventing "OutOfMemory" errors.

In the Guidewire Data Model, managing entity relationships through Subtyping is a core principle for maintaining a clean, performant, and logically structured database. According to the InsuranceSuite Developer Fundamentals course, subtyping should be used when a specific group of entities shares a common base but requires additional, unique attributes.

1. Leveraging the Existing Hierarchy

The prompt specifies that "other fields will come from the existing ABCompanyVendor entity." In the Guidewire ContactManager (AB) data model, the hierarchy typically flows from ABContact → ABCompany → ABCompanyVendor. By creating ABAutoRentalAgency_Ext as a subtype of ABCompanyVendor (Option A), the new entity automatically inherits all properties from the vendor level (such as Tax ID or Vendor Number) and the company level (such as Name or Address). This maximizes code and metadata reuse.

2. Why Subtyping is Better than Extension

If a developer were to follow Option D and add these three fields directly to ABCompanyVendor, every vendor in the system—including Law Firms, Doctors, and Repair Shops—would have fields for "Auto Rental License." This is known as "data model pollution." It makes the database tables wider than necessary and complicates the UI, as you would need complex "visible" expressions to hide these irrelevant fields for other vendor types.

By creating a specific subtype, Guidewire's Table-per-Subtype or Table-per-Hierarchy (depending on version and configuration) storage strategy ensures that these three specific fields are only relevant to Auto Rental Agency records. This keeps the data model logically distinct and allows for the use of Modal PCFs, where the UI automatically switches to display the correct fields based on the subtype of the contact being viewed.

Best Practice Summary: Use the _Ext suffix for the new subtype to follow Cloud Delivery Standards and place it as deep in the existing hierarchy as possible to inherit the most relevant specialized fields.

Database Consistency Checks (DBCCs) are the "canary in the coal mine" for data integrity. When high error counts appear in theData update and reconciliationcategory, it usually implies that recent configuration changes (Gosu rules, enhancements, or batch processes) are generating data that violates the underlying metadata constraints.

The first best practice isRoot Cause Analysis(Option A). Simply fixing the data in the database is a "band-aid" solution; if the underlying Gosu code that created the bad data is not fixed, the errors will immediately return. Developers must trace the lifecycle of the affected entities to find where the logic is failing.

The second best practice is to leverage theGuidewire Community Knowledge Base(Option E). Many DBCC errors, especially those following a version upgrade or a major configuration change, have been encountered by other insurers. The Knowledge Base often provides specific SQL patterns or Gosu fixes tailored to known platform behaviors.

Why other options are incorrect:

Option Bis dangerous; never promote code known to cause database inconsistencies to a production environment.

Option Cis irresponsible; data corruption should be addressed as soon as it is detected.

Option Dis a partial fix, but "running the script immediately" without a code fix or support review (as discussed in Question 61) is high-risk and violates Cloud Assurance standards.

In Guidewire InsuranceSuite UI design, balancing information density is a common challenge.List Views (LVs)are optimized for showing multiple records at once but are limited by horizontal screen real estate. When an entity has more fields than can comfortably fit in a table—as is the case with the expanded "Officials" entity—Guidewire best practices recommend using aPopup(Option C) for detailed editing.

A Popup is a specializedLocationtype that opens a secondary window over the current page. This allows the developer to embed a fullDetail View (DV)containing all the new fields (police badge numbers, department contact info, etc.) without navigating the user away from the main Claim screen. This "List-Detail" pattern is typically implemented by making one of the fields in the List View (like the Official's name) aLinkor by adding an "Edit" button that calls the popover or push method to launch the Popup.

Other location types are inappropriate for this specific requirement. AForward(Option A) is a non-visual location used for logical branching (deciding where to send a user based on data). APage(Option B) would take the user completely away from the current context, which is disruptive for a simple edit. ALocation Group(Option D) is used for structural navigation in the sidebar, not for individual record interaction. By utilizing a Popup, the developer provides a focused, high-density editing environment that maintains the user's workflow within the ClaimCenter application.

Implementing dynamic UI behavior where one field appears or disappears based on the value of another is a common task in GuidewirePage Configuration Framework (PCF). To achieve this "conditional visibility," two distinct configuration steps are required to ensure the user interface remains responsive and accurate.

1. Triggering the UI Refresh (Option B)

By default, the Guidewire web client does not send data to the server until a major action (like clicking "Update" or "Next") occurs. However, when one field's state depends on another, we need an immediate update. EnablingpostOnChangeon the "triggering" field—in this case, Preferred Vendor?—tells the application to perform an asynchronous (AJAX) request as soon as the user modifies that field. This refresh allows the PCF logic to re-evaluate properties for all other widgets on the screen.

2. Defining the Visibility Logic (Option C)

Once the page is set to refresh, the "target" field—the BBB Rating—must know when it is allowed to be seen. This is handled by thevisibleproperty. In Guidewire Studio, the developer enters a Gosu expression in the visible property of the BBB Rating widget, such as: contact.PreferredVendor == true (or the equivalent boolean/typekey check).

Why other options are incorrect:

Option A:The onChange property is for executing logic (like setting a default value), not for controlling visibility. Setting a value won't make the field appear.

Option D:Enabling postOnChange on the BBB Rating field itself is useless here, as it is the fieldbeing shown, not the fieldcausingthe change.

Option E:Setting the editable property only controls whether a field can be typed in; it does not hide the field from view, which is what the business analyst requested.

By combining postOnChange on the source and a visible expression on the target, the developer creates a modern, reactive user experience that adheres toGuidewire UI best practices.

TheGuidewire Cloud Platform (GWCP)development lifecycle is built around a modern CI/CD (Continuous Integration/Continuous Delivery) pipeline. This process moves code from a developer's local workstation through various "Planets" (environments) using integrated tools like Bitbucket, TeamCity, and Guidewire Home.

The first step in moving a local change toward production is committing andpushing the code to Bitbucket(Option C). Bitbucket serves as the centralized Git-based source code repository. This action triggers the "Build" phase of the lifecycle. Once the code is in Bitbucket, the next step involves the CI server,TeamCity. TeamCity is responsible for compiling the Gosu code, running automated GUnit tests, and performing static code analysis (Quality Gates). While TeamCity is often configured to trigger automatically upon a push, a developer may need to manuallytrigger or monitor the build via Guidewire Home(Option D) if they need immediate feedback or if the automation is set to a specific schedule.

Options such as "Deploying directly to pre-production" (Option A) are impossible in the GWCP model, as code must first pass through the "Dev" planet and satisfy quality gates before being promoted. "Scheduling automated builds" (Option B) is an administrative task, not an initial step for a developer's specific change. Finally, "creating a star system" (Option E) refers to the infrastructure setup usually handled by Guidewire Cloud operations, not a part of the standard code-change lifecycle. Following the C and D sequence ensures that the code is properly versioned, tested, and validated before it ever reaches a runtime environment.