C++ Operators & Expression Quiz

C++
0 Passed
0% acceptance

40 in-depth questions covering C++ arithmetic, comparison, logical operators, compound assignments, and precedence rules — with 10 code examples to solidify understanding.

40 Questions
~80 minutes
1

Question 1

When performing integer division in C++ where both operands are positive integers, what happens to the fractional part of the result and how does this differ from floating-point division?

A
Integer division truncates toward zero, discarding the fractional part entirely, while floating-point division preserves decimal precision up to the type's limits
B
Both integer and floating-point division preserve fractional parts, with automatic type promotion
C
Integer division rounds to the nearest whole number, while floating-point division truncates
D
Division behavior is identical for all numeric types in C++
2

Question 2

In a performance-critical loop that increments a counter variable by 1 in each iteration, what is the most efficient way to write the increment operation and why?

A
Use ++counter (pre-increment) for primitive types as it avoids creating a temporary copy compared to counter++
B
Use counter++ (post-increment) since it's more readable and compilers optimize both forms identically
C
Use counter += 1 for clarity since modern compilers generate identical code for all increment forms
D
Use counter = counter + 1 for maximum readability regardless of performance implications
3

Question 3

When evaluating a complex boolean expression with multiple AND and OR operators, what is the order of evaluation and how can short-circuiting affect the result?

A
Logical AND (&&) has higher precedence than OR (||), and both short-circuit, potentially skipping evaluation of right operands when the result is determined
B
All operands are always evaluated regardless of operator precedence or short-circuiting rules
C
OR has higher precedence than AND, and evaluation continues even when the result is known
D
Operator precedence is determined by the order of appearance in the expression
4

Question 4

In a mathematical calculation that requires checking if a number is both positive and even, what logical operator combination provides the most readable and efficient evaluation?

A
Use (number > 0) && (number % 2 == 0) for clear precedence and potential short-circuit optimization
B
Use number > 0 & number % 2 == 0 for bitwise operations that are faster than logical operators
C
Use nested if statements since logical operators are less efficient than control flow
D
Use single condition with complex expression since && and || are equivalent in performance
5

Question 5

When comparing floating-point values for equality in a physics simulation, what is the most reliable approach to handle precision limitations?

A
Use epsilon comparison: std::abs(a - b) < epsilon where epsilon accounts for floating-point precision limits
B
Direct equality comparison (a == b) works reliably for all floating-point calculations
C
Convert to integers first, then compare to avoid floating-point precision issues
D
Use string comparison after formatting to a fixed number of decimal places
6

Question 6

Consider this C++ expression evaluation. What will be the final value of result after this code executes?

cpp
#include <iostream>

int main() {
    int a = 5, b = 3, c = 2;
    int result = a + b * c - (a % b);
    std::cout << result;
    return 0;
}
A
Result is 10: multiplication has higher precedence than addition/subtraction, modulo is evaluated last
B
Result is 8: all operations have equal precedence and evaluate left-to-right
C
Result is 12: addition and subtraction have higher precedence than multiplication
D
Result is 6: modulo operation is performed first due to parentheses
7

Question 7

When implementing a bounds check for an array access where the index must be both non-negative and less than the array size, what logical expression provides the safest evaluation?

A
Use (index >= 0) && (index < size) to ensure both conditions are checked with short-circuit safety
B
Use index >= 0 & index < size for bitwise operations that prevent short-circuiting issues
C
Use nested if statements since logical operators can cause unexpected evaluation order
D
Use single comparison since array bounds checking is handled automatically by the compiler
8

Question 8

In a loop that accumulates values using compound assignment, what is the difference between += and extended assignment syntax in terms of performance and readability?

A
Compound assignment (+=) is more efficient for complex types and equally readable for simple operations
B
Extended syntax (x = x + y) is always faster since it avoids operator overloading overhead
C
Both forms compile to identical code for built-in types, with readability being the main consideration
D
Compound assignment is only available for arithmetic types, not user-defined classes
9

Question 9

When evaluating operator precedence in an expression containing mixed arithmetic and comparison operators, what is the evaluation order and why is this important?

A
Arithmetic operators have higher precedence than comparisons, requiring parentheses for correct evaluation of complex conditions
B
All operators have equal precedence and evaluate left-to-right regardless of type
C
Comparison operators are evaluated before arithmetic to prevent type conversion issues
D
Operator precedence is determined by the number of operands each operator takes
10

Question 10

In a conditional statement that must execute only when multiple independent conditions are all true, what logical operator should be used and why?

A
Logical AND (&&) ensures all conditions must be true, with short-circuiting for efficiency
B
Logical OR (||) allows execution when any condition is true, which is incorrect for this requirement
C
Bitwise AND (&) performs the operation on all bits simultaneously without short-circuiting
D
Nested if statements since logical operators cannot handle multiple independent conditions
11

Question 11

When implementing a counter that needs to wrap around to zero after reaching a maximum value, what arithmetic operator combination provides the most efficient implementation?

A
Use modulo operator: counter = (counter + 1) % (max_value + 1) for automatic wrapping behavior
B
Use if statement with reset: if (counter >= max_value) counter = 0; else counter++;
C
Use bitwise operations for faster wrapping on power-of-two boundaries
D
Use floating-point division and floor for precise wrapping calculations
12

Question 12

In an expression that combines multiplication and addition operations, what parentheses placement ensures the addition is performed before multiplication?

A
Use (a + b) * c to explicitly override the default precedence where multiplication has higher precedence
B
Use a + b * c since addition naturally has higher precedence than multiplication
C
Use a + (b * c) which is the default evaluation order anyway
D
Parentheses cannot change operator precedence in C++ expressions
13

Question 13

When checking if a value falls within a specific range using comparison operators, what is the most readable and efficient boolean expression?

A
Use (value >= min) && (value <= max) for clear intent and short-circuit evaluation benefits
B
Use value >= min & value <= max for bitwise operations that evaluate both conditions
C
Use nested if statements since compound boolean expressions are less efficient
D
Use single comparison since range checking is handled by the comparison operators automatically
14

Question 14

In a mathematical formula implementation where division must be performed before multiplication, what operator precedence consideration affects the implementation?

A
Multiplication has higher precedence than division, so a / b * c means (a / b) * c, requiring parentheses for a / (b * c)
B
Division has higher precedence than multiplication, so no parentheses are needed
C
Both multiplication and division have equal precedence and evaluate left-to-right
D
Operator precedence for arithmetic operators is determined by operand types
15

Question 15

When implementing a toggle operation that switches a boolean flag between true and false states, what logical operator provides the most efficient implementation?

A
Use logical NOT (!flag) for clear intent and optimal performance with boolean types
B
Use flag = !flag for explicit assignment that works with any type
C
Use flag ^= true for bitwise XOR toggle that modifies the flag in place
D
Use if-else statement since logical operators cannot modify variables directly
16

Question 16

Consider this compound assignment operation. What will be the value of x after execution?

cpp
#include <iostream>

int main() {
    int x = 10;
    x *= 2 + 3;
    std::cout << x;
    return 0;
}
A
x becomes 50: compound assignment has lower precedence than addition, so x *= (2 + 3) = 10 * 5 = 50
B
x becomes 25: addition is evaluated first, then multiplied by the original x value
C
x becomes 30: the expression is evaluated as (x * 2) + 3 due to left-to-right associativity
D
x becomes 13: compound assignment is equivalent to x = x * 2 + 3
17

Question 17

In a validation function that must check multiple error conditions where any single failure should prevent continuation, what logical operator structure is most appropriate?

A
Use logical OR (||) with early return: if (condition1 || condition2 || condition3) return false;
B
Use logical AND (&&) since all conditions must be checked for complete validation
C
Use nested if statements to ensure all conditions are evaluated regardless of results
D
Use bitwise OR (|) for faster evaluation of multiple conditions simultaneously
18

Question 18

When implementing a scaling operation that multiplies a value by a factor and adds an offset, what operator precedence ensures the multiplication is performed before addition?

A
Default precedence already handles this correctly: value * factor + offset evaluates as (value * factor) + offset
B
Use parentheses: (value * factor) + offset to ensure multiplication before addition
C
Use compound assignment: value *= factor += offset for optimal performance
D
Use explicit order: value + offset * factor with different operator precedence rules
19

Question 19

In a loop condition that must continue while a counter is within bounds and a flag is set, what logical operator combination provides the correct behavior?

A
Use (counter < limit) && flag for short-circuit evaluation that checks bounds first, then flag
B
Use counter < limit || flag for OR logic that continues on either condition
C
Use counter < limit & flag for bitwise operations that evaluate both conditions
D
Use single condition since loop bounds and flags cannot be combined logically
20

Question 20

When evaluating an expression with mixed signed and unsigned integer types, what type promotion rules affect the comparison result?

A
Unsigned types promote signed types in mixed expressions, potentially causing unexpected comparison results due to value range differences
B
Signed and unsigned types cannot be mixed in expressions and will cause compilation errors
C
Signed types always take precedence over unsigned in mixed operations
D
Type promotion rules only affect arithmetic operations, not comparisons
21

Question 21

In a conditional expression that uses the ternary operator to select between two values based on a boolean condition, what is the evaluation order and potential pitfalls?

A
Condition is evaluated first, then only the selected branch is evaluated, avoiding unnecessary computations but requiring compatible types
B
Both branches are always evaluated regardless of the condition value
C
The condition is evaluated last after both branches are computed
D
Ternary operator cannot be used with complex expressions due to evaluation order restrictions
22

Question 22

When implementing a bounds-checking function that validates array access, what comparison operator combination ensures the index is valid for the given array size?

A
Use (index >= 0) && (index < size) to ensure non-negative index within array bounds
B
Use index >= 0 || index < size for OR logic that allows out-of-bounds access
C
Use index >= 0 & index < size for bitwise validation of array bounds
D
Use single comparison since array bounds are checked automatically by the compiler
23

Question 23

In an expression calculating the area of a rectangle with integer dimensions, what potential overflow issue arises with large dimension values and how can it be addressed?

A
Integer multiplication can overflow, requiring larger types or overflow checking before the operation
B
Integer overflow is impossible in C++ as the language automatically promotes types
C
Use floating-point types since they can represent arbitrarily large values
D
Overflow only occurs with division operations, not multiplication
24

Question 24

When implementing a sorting condition that must handle three-way comparison (less than, equal, greater than), what operator combination provides the most efficient implementation?

A
Use chained comparisons: if (a < b) ... else if (a > b) ... else ... for clear three-way logic
B
Use single comparison with logical operators: if ((a < b) || (a > b)) for two-way logic
C
Use arithmetic subtraction: if ((a - b) < 0) for less than, zero for equal, greater than
D
Use equality only since three-way comparison is not supported in basic C++
25

Question 25

In a mathematical expression that requires computing the remainder of integer division with negative numbers, what behavior should be expected and why?

A
Modulo result has the same sign as the dividend in C++11 and later, ensuring consistent behavior across implementations
B
Modulo with negative numbers is undefined behavior and should be avoided
C
Modulo always produces positive results regardless of operand signs
D
Modulo behavior depends on the compiler implementation and optimization level
26

Question 26

When evaluating a complex expression with multiple operators of the same precedence level, what associativity rule determines the evaluation order?

A
Most operators associate left-to-right, so a + b + c evaluates as (a + b) + c, while assignment associates right-to-left
B
All operators associate right-to-left for consistency across the language
C
Associativity is determined by the number of operands each operator takes
D
Associativity rules only apply to unary operators, not binary operators
27

Question 27

In a validation routine that must check if a string length is within acceptable bounds, what comparison operator combination ensures the length is valid?

A
Use (length >= min_length) && (length <= max_length) for inclusive range checking with short-circuit evaluation
B
Use length >= min_length || length <= max_length for OR logic that accepts any length
C
Use length >= min_length & length <= max_length for bitwise range validation
D
Use single comparison since string length validation is handled by standard library functions
28

Question 28

When implementing a bit-shifting operation for efficient multiplication or division by powers of two, what operator provides the most efficient implementation and what are the limitations?

A
Left shift (<<) for multiplication by powers of 2, right shift (>>) for division, but overflow behavior must be considered
B
Arithmetic operators (*, /) are always more efficient than bit shifts on modern processors
C
Bit shifts only work with unsigned types and cannot be used for signed arithmetic
D
Bit shifting is obsolete in modern C++ and should be replaced with standard arithmetic
29

Question 29

In a conditional statement that must execute when either of two independent conditions is true, what logical operator should be used and why?

A
Logical OR (||) allows execution when at least one condition is true, with short-circuiting for efficiency
B
Logical AND (&&) requires both conditions to be true, which is incorrect for this requirement
C
Bitwise OR (|) evaluates both conditions regardless of the first result
D
Nested if statements since logical operators cannot express OR conditions
30

Question 30

When implementing a clamping function that constrains a value between minimum and maximum bounds, what operator combination provides the most efficient implementation?

A
Use std::min(std::max(value, min), max) or conditional operator for branchless clamping with optimal performance
B
Use if-else statements since they provide clearer intent than complex expressions
C
Use arithmetic operations only, avoiding comparison operators for better performance
D
Use bitwise operations to clamp values without conditional logic
31

Question 31

In an expression that combines logical NOT with other logical operators, what precedence rules affect the evaluation and how can parentheses clarify the intent?

A
Logical NOT (!) has higher precedence than && and ||, so !a && b means (!a) && b, requiring parentheses for !(a && b)
B
All logical operators have equal precedence and evaluate left-to-right
C
Logical NOT has lower precedence than binary logical operators
D
Parentheses cannot change the precedence of logical operators in C++
32

Question 32

When evaluating operator precedence in an assignment expression that includes function calls, what evaluation order must be considered?

A
Function calls have higher precedence than assignment, so a = func() + b evaluates as a = (func() + b)
B
Assignment has higher precedence than function calls, requiring parentheses around assignments
C
Function calls and assignment have equal precedence and evaluate right-to-left
D
Operator precedence does not apply to expressions containing function calls
33

Question 33

In a loop that processes array elements while a condition remains true, what logical operator combination ensures correct continuation logic?

A
Use (index < size) && condition for short-circuit evaluation that checks bounds before condition
B
Use index < size || condition for OR logic that continues on either requirement
C
Use index < size & condition for bitwise evaluation of loop conditions
D
Use single condition since array bounds and logical conditions cannot be combined
34

Question 34

When implementing a mathematical formula that requires computing the absolute difference between two values, what operator combination provides the most efficient implementation?

A
Use std::abs(a - b) for clear intent and proper handling of signed/unsigned differences
B
Use (a > b) ? (a - b) : (b - a) for conditional absolute value calculation
C
Use bitwise operations to compute absolute value without conditional logic
D
Use floating-point arithmetic since integer absolute value is not well-defined
35

Question 35

In an expression that must evaluate multiple conditions with different priorities, what combination of logical operators and parentheses ensures correct evaluation order?

A
Use parentheses to group related conditions: (primary && secondary) || fallback for explicit precedence control
B
Rely on default precedence since logical operators have consistent evaluation rules
C
Use bitwise operators (&, |) for precise control over evaluation order
D
Parentheses have no effect on logical operator evaluation in C++
36

Question 36

Consider this expression with mixed operators. What will be the result of this evaluation?

cpp
#include <iostream>

int main() {
    int a = 4, b = 2, c = 3;
    bool result = (a > b) && (c < a) || (b == 2);
    std::cout << std::boolalpha << result;
    return 0;
}
A
Result is true: (4 > 2) && (3 < 4) evaluates to true, making the entire OR expression true
B
Result is false: logical AND has higher precedence than OR, but the second condition fails
C
Result is true: logical OR evaluates first, making the entire expression true regardless of AND result
D
Result is false: parentheses change precedence, causing different evaluation order
37

Question 37

When implementing a validation function that must check if a numeric value is within an acceptable range and meets additional criteria, what logical structure provides the most maintainable code?

A
Use early returns with logical AND: if (!(value >= min && value <= max)) return false; if (!additional_check) return false;
B
Use single complex expression with multiple logical operators for better performance
C
Use nested if statements to check each condition separately without logical operators
D
Use bitwise operations for all validation checks to avoid short-circuiting issues
38

Question 38

In a performance-critical calculation that must avoid division operations, what operator can be used to implement efficient integer division by a constant power of two?

A
Right shift operator (>>) provides fast division by powers of 2, but requires careful handling of negative numbers
B
Left shift operator (<<) for division operations on modern processors
C
Arithmetic division (/) is always faster than bit operations on current hardware
D
Bit shifting cannot be used for division operations in C++
39

Question 39

When evaluating an expression that combines comparison and arithmetic operators, what precedence rules determine the evaluation order?

A
Arithmetic operators have higher precedence than comparisons, so a + b > c evaluates as (a + b) > c
B
Comparison operators have higher precedence than arithmetic, requiring parentheses for correct evaluation
C
All operators have equal precedence in mixed expressions
D
Precedence rules only apply to operators of the same type
40

Question 40

In a complex boolean expression that must handle multiple conditions with specific evaluation requirements, what combination of logical operators and short-circuiting behavior provides the most robust implementation?

A
Careful use of && and || with awareness of short-circuiting to control evaluation order and avoid side effects
B
Avoid short-circuiting entirely by using bitwise operators for all boolean logic
C
Use only nested if-else statements since logical operators are unreliable for complex conditions
D
Short-circuiting behavior is unpredictable and should not be relied upon in production code

QUIZZES IN C++