In order for an instance of a derived class to completely take over a class member from a base class, the base class has to declare that member as ?->(Show Answer!)

1. In order for an instance of a derived class to completely take over a class member from a base class, the base class has to declare that member as

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->A 1 km long train passes through a tunnel of 1 km length at a speed of 1 km per minute. How much time will it take to pass through it completely?....

QA->There are 50 students in a class. In a class test 22 students get 25 marks each, 18 students get 30 marks each. Each of the remaining gets 16 marks. The average mark of the whole class is :....

QA->In a class of 20 students the average age is 16 years.If the age of the class teacher is added to that of students,the average age of the class becomes 17 years.What is the age of the teacher?....

QA->The name Idukki has been derived from....

QA->The Government of India has decided to declare which river as ‘National River’?....

MCQ->What will be the output of the following program? #include<iostream.h> class Base { int x, y; public: Base() { x = y = 0; } Base(int xx) { x = xx; } Base(int p, int q = 10) { x = p + q; y = q; } void Display(void) { cout<< x << " " << y << endl; } }objDefault(1, 1); class Derived: public Base { Base obj; public: Derived(int xx, int yy): Base(xx, xx + 1) { } Derived(Base objB = objDefault) { } }; int main() { Derived objD(5, 3); Derived ptrD = new Derived(objD); ptrD->Display(); delete ptrD; return 0; }....

MCQ->In order for an instance of a derived class to completely take over a class member from a base class, the base class has to declare that member as....

MCQ-> Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the follow. Popper claimed, scientific beliefs are universal in character, and have to be so if they are to serve us in explanation and prediction. For the universality of a scientific belief implies that, no matter how many instances we have found positive, there will always be an indefinite number of unexamined instances which may or may not also be positive. We have no good reason for supposing that any of these unexamined instances will be positive, or will be negative, so we must refrain from drawing any conclusions. On the other hand, a single negative instance is sufficient to prove that the belief is false, for such an instance is logically incompatible with the universal truth of the belief. Provided, therefore, that the instance is accepted as negative we must conclude that the scientific belief is false. In short, we can sometimes deduce that a universal scientific belief is false but we can never induce that a universal scientific belief is true. It is sometimes argued that this 'asymmetry' between verification and falsification is not nearly as pronounced as Popper declared it to be. Thus, there is no inconsistency in holding that a universal scientific belief is false despite any number of positive instances; and there is no inconsistency either in holding that a universal scientific belief is true despite the evidence of a negative instance. For the belief that an instance is negative is itself a scientific belief and may be falsified by experimental evidence which we accept and which is inconsistent with it. When, for example, we draw a right-angled triangle on the surface of a sphere using parts of three great circles for its sides, and discover that for this triangle Pythagoras' Theorem does not hold, we may decide that this apparently negative instance is not really negative because it is not a genuine instance at all. Triangles drawn on the surfaces of spheres are not the sort of triangles which fall within the scope of Pythagoras' Theorem. Falsification, that is to say, is no more capable of yielding conclusive rejections of scientific belief than verification is of yielding conclusive acceptances of scientific beliefs. The asymmetry between falsification and verification, therefore, has less logical significance than Popper supposed. We should, though, resist this reasoning. Falsifications may not be conclusive, for the acceptances on which rejections are based are always provisional acceptances. But, nevertheless, it remains the case that, in falsification, if we accept falsifying claims then, to remain consistent, we must reject falsified claims. On the other hand, although verifications are also not conclusive, our acceptance or rejection of verifying instances has no implications concerning the acceptance or rejection of verified claims. Falsifying claims sometimes give us a good reason for rejecting a scientific belief, namely when the claims are accepted. But verifying claims, even when accepted, give us no good and appropriate reason for accepting any scientific belief, because any such reason would have to be inductive to be appropriate and there are no good inductive reasons.According to Popper, the statement "Scientific beliefs are universal in character" implies that....

MCQ->Which of the following statements are correct about the this reference? this reference can be modified in the instance member function of a class. Static functions of a class never receive the this reference. Instance member functions of a class always receive a this reference. this reference continues to exist even after control returns from an instance member function. While calling an instance member function we are not required to pass the this reference explicitly.....

MCQ->Which of the following statements are correct about Inheritance in C#.NET? A derived class object contains all the base class data. Inheritance cannot suppress the base class functionality. A derived class may not be able to access all the base class data. Inheritance cannot extend the base class functionality. In inheritance chain construction of object happens from base towards derived.....