Edexcel GCSE Computer Science (1CP2) Exam Questions

Award up to two marks for a linked description such as:

• A compiler produces object code/machine code/an executable (file) (1) whereas an interpreter produces no object code/translated file (1)
• A compiler produces a machine code file (1) that can be run on its own/without the compiler/translator being present (1)
• An interpreter produces no object code/file (1) because it translates and executes each line instead of saving translated code (1)
• The compiler's output can be saved/stored (1) and run again later, while interpreted code has to be translated again each time it is run (1)

Allow binary for machine code.

Allow executable/an executable for object code.

Do not accept responses about translating the whole program, reporting errors or the speed of execution.

Do not accept 'the interpreter translates/executes one line at a time' on its own: this is how it translates, not what it produces. It earns the development only when linked to no object code/translated file being produced.

Do not accept the interpreter producing object code/an executable.

Award up to two marks for a linked explanation such as:

• Terminators absorb the signal at the ends of the cable (1) so it is not reflected back along the bus (1)
• Terminators prevent signals reflecting/bouncing back (1) so the reflected signal does not corrupt data on the cable (1)
• Terminators absorb the signal (1) so it does not collide/interfere with data being sent by other devices (1)
• Terminators stop the signal reflecting back down the cable (1) so data can be transmitted and received without errors (1)

For both marks, the expansion must follow/associate with the statement.

Allow 'interfere'/'corrupt' only where the answer says the reflected signal mixes with/collides with data on the cable.

Do not accept 'to stop the signal' on its own, as stopping the signal is not the same as stopping it reflecting back along the cable.

Do not accept 'to terminate the cable/network', 'to end the cable' or 'to stop the cable breaking'.

Do not award responses that only repeat the stem, e.g. 'because there is a terminator at each end'.

Indicative content

Control of the hardware

• Low-level languages can read and write the contents of registers and memory addresses directly, so the firmware can take the values from the distance sensors without calling a library routine.
• Assembly language instructions can read from and write to specific input/output ports on the vacuum cleaner's processor, so the motors can be switched on and off directly.
• The programmer decides exactly which processor operations are carried out and in which order, which matters when the vacuum must reverse away from a step or an obstacle.
• A low-level language puts nothing between the program and the hardware, so the programmer can control the hardware of the vacuum cleaner precisely.

Efficiency of the code

• Assembly language code can be hand-optimised instruction by instruction, so the code that checks a sensor is as short as possible.
• The programmer can choose which registers hold values that are used again and again, which cuts down the number of memory accesses the firmware needs.
• A hand-written low-level program can be made compact, so it is more likely to fit in the small amount of memory the vacuum cleaner has.
• Because each instruction does one defined job, the time taken to react to a sensor reading is predictable, which suits firmware that must not overrun.

Link between the language and the processor

• Low-level languages are processor-specific, so the instructions used are those of the exact processor in the vacuum cleaner rather than general statements that need translating.
• Each assembly language instruction maps to one machine code instruction, so the programmer knows precisely which processor operation will be carried out by each line of code.
• An assembler turns each mnemonic into its machine code equivalent, so the machine code running on the vacuum cleaner's processor is exactly what the programmer wrote.
• Code written for a different processor would have to be rewritten, which is acceptable here because the vacuum cleaner always uses the same processor.

Levels

• Level 0 (0 marks): No rewardable content.
• Level 1 (1–2 marks): Basic, independent points are made, showing elements of understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion will contain basic information with little linkage between points made or application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 2 (3–4 marks): Demonstrates adequate understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science. (AO1) The discussion shows some linkages and lines of reasoning with some structure and application to the context. (AO2)
• Level 3 (5–6 marks): Demonstrates comprehensive understanding of key concepts/principles of computer science to support the discussion being presented. (AO1) The discussion is well developed, with sustained lines of reasoning that are coherent and logically structured, and which clearly apply to the context. (AO2)

Within Level 1, award 1 mark for a single basic point and 2 marks for two or more independent basic points; Level 2 requires the points to be linked to the vacuum cleaner; Level 3 requires both control of the hardware and efficiency of the code, and a few concise, linked sentences can reach Level 3, so extra length is not required.

Accept registers, memory addresses, input/output ports, machine code and mnemonics as ways of describing access to the hardware, and accept 'a low-level language is faster' as a basic point on its own. Do not award 'binary is a low-level language' (machine code is written in binary, but binary is not a language), or characteristics of high-level languages such as being easy to read or portable, as characteristics of a low-level language.