Answer:
B I hope I'm right sorry if I'm wrong
Answer:
False
Explanation:
High resolution just mean It looks better
Answer:
#include<iostream>
#include<iomanip>
using namespacestd;
int main ()
{
int x1[3][3]={1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
int x2[3][3];
int i,j;
for(i=0;i<3;i++)
for(j=0;j<3;j++)
x2[i][j] = x1[i][j];
cout<<"copy from x1 to x2 , x2 is :";
for(i=0;i<3;i++)
for(j=0;j<3;j++)
cout<<x2[i][j]<<" ";
cout<<endl;
system("pause");
return 0;
}
/* Sample output
copy from x1 to x2 , x2 is :1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Press any key to continue . . .
*/
Explanation:
Answer:
im not exactly sure but i think its c
Explanation:
Answer:
Finding kth element is more efficient in a doubly-linked list when compared to a singly-linked list
Explanation:
Assuming that both lists have firs_t and last_ pointers.
For a singly-linked list ; when locating a kth element, you have iterate through a number of k-1 elements which means that locating an element will be done only in one ( 1 ) direction
For a Doubly-linked list : To locate the Kth element can be done from two ( directions ) i.e. if the Kth element can found either by traversing the number of elements before it or after it . This makes finding the Kth element faster because the shortest route can be taken.
<em>Finding kth element is more efficient in a doubly-linked list when compared to a singly-linked list </em>
