Discuss C++ Institute CPP Exam Topic 1 Question 85

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

#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;

}

Aoperator int() const { return a;} inserted at Place 1

Bbool operator < (const A & b) const { return a<b.a;} inserted at Place 1

Cbool operator < (const A & b) const { return b.a

Dstruct 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();

Suggested Answer: C

Get Premium CPP Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test

30 comments · newest first

Dante 11 months ago

I agree, D makes sense for the multimap.

Elke 11 months ago

Surprised that we need a struct for the comparator!

Tien 11 months ago

Wait, C seems off. Why would we reverse the comparison?

Elenore 11 months ago

I think B is the right choice too.

Virgie 11 months ago

A and D are definitely needed!

Pamella 12 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.

Tammi 12 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.

Yolande 12 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.

Karan 1 year ago

I think option B is definitely needed for the comparison to work in the multimap, but I'm not sure about the others.

Brianne 1 year 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.

Ming 1 year 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.

Theodora 1 year 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.

Merilyn 1 year 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.

Providencia 1 year 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.

Scot 1 year 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.

Elin 1 year 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.

Rueben 1 year 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.

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.

Tennie 1 year ago

↳ replying to Lashonda

User 2

Melynda 1 year ago

↳ replying to Lashonda

User 1

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?

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?

Earleen 1 year ago

↳ replying to Wenona

D) struct R { bool operator ()(const A & a, const A & b) { return a.getA()

Lauran 1 year ago

↳ replying to Wenona

C) bool operator < (const A & b) const { return b.a

Angelica 1 year ago

↳ replying to Wenona

B) bool operator < (const A & b) const { return a

Jestine 1 year ago

↳ replying to Wenona

A) operator int() const { return a;} inserted at Place 1

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.

Valene 2 years ago

Hmm, you might be right. Let's see which option actually works when we try to compile the code.

Pauline 2 years ago

I disagree, I believe option D is the correct choice because it provides the necessary comparison function for the multimap.

Valene 2 years ago

I think option A will allow the code to compile and display the desired output.

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