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 2 Question 77 Discussion

Actual exam question for C++ Institute's CPP exam
Question #: 77
Topic #: 2
[All CPP Questions]

Which are NOT valid instantiations of priority_queue object:

#include

#include

#include

#include

#include

using namespace std;

int main()

{

deque mydeck;list mylist; vector myvector;

priority_queue first;//line I

priority_queue > second;//line II

priority_queue third(first);//line III

priority_queue > fourth(third);//line IV

priority_queue > fifth(myvector.begin(), myvector.end());//line V

return 0;

}

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: E

by Colette at Jan 27, 2024, 10:52 PM

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
Caprice
5 months ago
Definitely line IV, lists can't be used like that!
upvoted 0 times
...
Carri
5 months ago
Wait, can you really use a list in a priority_queue?
upvoted 0 times
...
Quentin
6 months ago
Line II is good too, deque works with priority_queue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tambra
6 months ago
I think line IV is the one that's not valid.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brigette
6 months ago
Line III is valid, just a copy constructor.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
6 months ago
I practiced a similar question, and I think line V is fine because it uses a vector, which is a valid underlying container for a priority queue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Avery
7 months ago
Line IV seems off to me; I don't recall if you can instantiate a priority queue with another priority queue as a parameter.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carmelina
7 months ago
I remember something about the container types for priority queues, and I feel like line II is valid since deque is one of the allowed types.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosio
7 months ago
I think line III might be problematic because it looks like it's trying to copy a priority queue, but I'm not sure if that's allowed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erin
7 months ago
This looks like a tricky question, but I think I can figure it out. I'll need to carefully consider the valid container types for priority_queue and how they interact with the provided examples.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bulah
7 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the different container types being used here. I'll need to refresh my memory on the requirements for the priority_queue constructor and make sure I understand the differences between these containers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Christa
7 months ago
I think I know the answer to this one. The priority_queue container requires a specific type of underlying container, and not all of these options are valid. I'll need to double-check the details, but I'm feeling confident about this.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alton
7 months ago
Okay, let me see. The first line seems straightforward, but the others might have some restrictions I'm not sure about. I'll have to review the priority_queue documentation to be sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashawna
7 months ago
Hmm, this looks tricky. I'll need to carefully read through the code and think about the requirements for a valid priority_queue instantiation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bong
7 months ago
This question seems straightforward, I'm pretty confident I can figure it out.
upvoted 0 times
...
Winifred
7 months ago
I think the key here is to focus on the idea of consistency. Consistent service means treating all customers the same way, so the priority assignment should be based on a standardized agreement, not individual factors. I'm leaning towards option C, but I'll double-check the other choices just to be sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Zack
7 months ago
I'm torn between A and B because it could be tricky. Were there some conditions in the script that might lead to only nine objects being created instead?
upvoted 0 times
...
Malcom
12 months ago
I'm pretty sure all the other lines are valid instantiations. Line IV is the only one that doesn't work. Now, if they asked me to instantiate a priority_queue with a banana, that would be a different story!
upvoted 0 times
Shawnda
10 months ago
I agree with you, line IV is the only one that doesn't work. The rest are valid instantiations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mary
10 months ago
No, I'm pretty confident that line II is valid. It's line IV that doesn't work.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stephaine
10 months ago
Are you sure about that? I think line II is also not a valid instantiation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Timothy
10 months ago
E) line V
upvoted 0 times
...
Antonio
10 months ago
D) line IV
upvoted 0 times
...
Raina
10 months ago
C) line III
upvoted 0 times
...
Margarita
10 months ago
B) line II
upvoted 0 times
...
Mattie
10 months ago
A) line I
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Cyril
1 year ago
Haha, it's funny how they try to trick us with a list. Who uses a list for a priority queue? That's like trying to use a toaster to dry your hair!
upvoted 0 times
Eun
11 months ago
It's like using a toaster to dry your hair, totally useless!
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavonne
11 months ago
C) line III
upvoted 0 times
...
Paris
11 months ago
I agree, a list is not efficient for a priority queue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Irma
11 months ago
Definitely! A priority queue should be implemented with a deque or a vector.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buck
11 months ago
Haha, I know right! Using a list for a priority queue is a bad idea.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pamela
12 months ago
B) line II
upvoted 0 times
...
Lyda
12 months ago
A) line I
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Carissa
1 year ago
I believe line V is also not valid because it is trying to initialize a priority_queue with iterators from a vector.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lauran
1 year ago
I agree with Van, line I is incorrect because it is missing the container type.
upvoted 0 times
...
Van
1 year ago
I think line I is not a valid instantiation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maynard
1 year ago
I agree with Mabel. The list is not a valid container for a priority_queue, so line IV is not a valid instantiation.
upvoted 0 times
Cecily
11 months ago
That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!
upvoted 0 times
...
Sherrell
1 year ago
So, the correct answer would be D) line IV.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beckie
1 year ago
Yes, I agree. The correct containers for priority_queue are deque and vector.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marget
1 year ago
I think line IV is not valid because list is not a valid container for priority_queue.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Carmela
1 year ago
I believe line V is also not valid because it is trying to initialize a priority_queue with iterators from a vector.
upvoted 0 times
...
Darrin
1 year ago
I agree with Willetta, line I is incorrect because it is missing the container type.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mabel
1 year ago
The correct answer is line IV. A priority_queue can only be instantiated with a deque or a vector as the underlying container, not a list.
upvoted 0 times
...
Willetta
1 year ago
I think line I is not a valid instantiation.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel