Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

C++ Institute CPP Exam - Topic 1 Question 85 Discussion

Which changes introduced independently will allow the code to compile and display ''one'' ''eight'' ''nine'' ''ten''? Choose all that apply.#include #include #include using namespace std;class A {int a;public:A(int a):a(a){}int getA() const { return a;}/* Insert Code Here 1 */};/* Insert Code Here 2 */int main(){int t[] ={ 3, 4, 2, 1, 6, 5, 7, 9, 8, 10 };string s[] = {"three", "four", "two", "one", "six","five", "seven", "nine","eight","ten"};multimap m;/* Replace Code Here 3 */for(int i=0; i
C) bool operator < (const A & b) const { return b.a
A) operator int() const { return a;} inserted at Place 1
B) bool operator < (const A & b) const { return a<b.a;} inserted at Place 1
D) struct R { bool operator ()(const A & a, const A & b) { return a.getA()<b.getA();} }; inserted at Place 2 replacing line marked 3 with multimap<A, string, R> m; replacong line marked 4 with multimap<A, string, R>::iterator i=m.begin();

C++ Institute CPP Exam - Topic 1 Question 85 Discussion

Actual exam question for C++ Institute's CPP exam
Question #: 85
Topic #: 1
[All CPP Questions]

Which changes introduced independently will allow the code to compile and display ''one'' ''eight'' ''nine'' ''ten''? Choose all that apply.

#include

#include

#include

using namespace std;

class A {

int a;

public:

A(int a):a(a){}

int getA() const { return a;}

/* Insert Code Here 1 */

};

/* Insert Code Here 2 */

int main(){

int t[] ={ 3, 4, 2, 1, 6, 5, 7, 9, 8, 10 };

string s[] = {"three", "four", "two", "one", "six","five", "seven", "nine","eight","ten"};

multimap m;/* Replace Code Here 3 */

for(int i=0; i<10; i++) {

m.insert(pair(A(t[i]),s[i]));

}

m.erase(m.lower_bound(2),m.upper_bound(7));

multimap::iterator i=m.begin();/* Replace Code Here 4 */

for( ; i!= m.end(); i++) {

cout<second<<" ";

}

cout<

return 0;

}

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Vallie at May 19, 2024, 06:58 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CPP Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Dante
8 months ago
I agree, D makes sense for the multimap.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elke
9 months ago
Surprised that we need a struct for the comparator!
upvoted 0 times
...
Tien
9 months ago
Wait, C seems off. Why would we reverse the comparison?
upvoted 0 times
...
Elenore
9 months ago
I think B is the right choice too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Virgie
9 months ago
A and D are definitely needed!
upvoted 0 times
...
Pamella
10 months ago
I think option C is incorrect because it reverses the comparison, which doesn't make sense for sorting. I’m leaning towards B and D being the right answers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tammi
10 months ago
I feel like option D is a good choice since it defines a functor for the multimap, but I'm a bit confused about how it interacts with the other options.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yolande
10 months ago
I remember practicing a similar question where we had to define comparison operators for a class. I think option A might be useful too, but I can't recall if it's necessary here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karan
10 months ago
I think option B is definitely needed for the comparison to work in the multimap, but I'm not sure about the others.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brianne
10 months ago
This is a good test of our understanding of C++ classes, operator overloading, and the multimap container. I'll need to work through this step-by-step to make sure I get the right solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ming
10 months ago
Okay, I think I've got a handle on this. The key is to implement a custom comparison function for the A class so that the multimap can sort the elements properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Theodora
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the different options. I'll need to think through each one and see how it would impact the code's behavior.
upvoted 0 times
...
Merilyn
10 months ago
This looks like a tricky question. I'll need to carefully read through the code and understand the problem before attempting to solve it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Providencia
10 months ago
I'm feeling pretty confident about this one. I think option D is the way to go - it provides the custom comparison function and updates the multimap declaration and iterator accordingly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Scot
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused on this one. I know ABC includes more overhead costs, but I'm not sure how that impacts the reported profits.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elin
10 months ago
Okay, let's see. The application works directly on the servers, so the issue must be with the LTM configuration. I'll need to think through the options carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rueben
11 months ago
I remember learning about weekly distribution in class, but I'm not totally confident I understand all the details. I'll have to read the options closely.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashonda
1 year ago
I'm going to go with options B and D. The custom comparator seems like a cleaner solution than overloading the less-than operator directly on the A class.
upvoted 0 times
Tennie
1 year ago
User 2
upvoted 0 times
...
Melynda
1 year ago
User 1
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Kris
1 year ago
Option D looks promising, but I'm not sure about the custom comparator. Shouldn't we just use the default less-than operator for the A class?
upvoted 0 times
...
Wenona
1 year ago
Haha, the problem says 'choose all that apply', so I'm going to mark all of them just to be safe! Better too many than too few, right?
upvoted 0 times
Earleen
1 year ago
D) struct R { bool operator ()(const A & a, const A & b) { return a.getA()
upvoted 0 times
...
Lauran
1 year ago
C) bool operator < (const A & b) const { return b.a
upvoted 0 times
...
Angelica
1 year ago
B) bool operator < (const A & b) const { return a
upvoted 0 times
...
Jestine
1 year ago
A) operator int() const { return a;} inserted at Place 1
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lenna
1 year ago
I think option B is the correct answer. Comparing the object's 'a' member directly should allow the multimap to sort the keys properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Valene
1 year ago
Hmm, you might be right. Let's see which option actually works when we try to compile the code.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pauline
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe option D is the correct choice because it provides the necessary comparison function for the multimap.
upvoted 0 times
...
Valene
1 year ago
I think option A will allow the code to compile and display the desired output.
upvoted 0 times
...