Answer:
The detail answer to this question is given in the explanation section.
The correct answer is .info
Explanation:
Let look as each statement
p.info.important
this is a specific because it says
go to important property which is inside info property which is inside P
.info is less specific
because it will go to .info No function is given whose property is this.
p.info
This is some what specific. As it says select .info property which is inside p
Answer:
go to the side with you mouse drag it ove or the restoere down button at the top right in between the - and the x hope this haelp may you mark me as brainlyest pls and thank you have a bless day <3
Explanation:
Answer:
<em>C++.</em>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
int main() {
int weekly_hours = 0;
int hourly_rate;
float gross_pay = 0;
cout<<"Enter weekly hours worked: ";
cin>>weekly_hours;
cout<<"Enter hourly rate: ";
cin>>hourly_rate;
cout<<endl;
////////////////////////////////////////////////
if (weekly_hours > 40) {
gross_pay = (weekly_hours*hourly_rate) + ((weekly_hours*hourly_rate)*0.5);
}
else
gross_pay = weekly_hours*hourly_rate;
cout<<"Weekly gross pay: $"<<gross_pay;
////////////////////////////////////////////////
return 0;
}
Answer:
Following are the response to the given question:
Explanation:
The glamorous objective is to examine the items (as being the most valuable and "cheapest" items are chosen) while no item is selectable - in other words, the loading can be reached.
Assume that such a strategy also isn't optimum, this is that there is the set of items not including one of the selfish strategy items (say, i-th item), but instead a heavy, less valuable item j, with j > i and is optimal.
As
, the i-th item may be substituted by the j-th item, as well as the overall load is still sustainable. Moreover, because
and this strategy is better, our total profit has dropped. Contradiction.