Explore key concepts of short-circuit evaluation in programming with this focused quiz. Assess your understanding of boolean expressions, common pitfalls, and scenarios where short-circuit logic influences code execution.
In the boolean expression (x != 0) u0026u0026 (10 / x u003E 1), what happens if x is 0?
Explanation: Short-circuit evaluation prevents the second part of an AND expression from running if the first part is false, so division by zero is avoided when x is 0. The distractor 'A division by zero error occurs' is incorrect because the error does not happen due to short-circuiting. Saying both expressions are always evaluated is inaccurate since that's not how short-circuiting works. The result is not always true; the outcome depends on the value of x.
Given the expression (isReady() || performSetup()), which function will definitely be called every time the expression is executed?
Explanation: In a logical OR expression, the left-hand side function is always called first, so isReady() will always execute. 'performSetup()' may be skipped if isReady() returns true. 'Both functions are always called' ignores short-circuit evaluation. 'Neither function is guaranteed to be called' is incorrect because at least isReady() runs.
Why can using side-effect functions in short-circuit expressions, like (check() u0026u0026 increment()), be risky?
Explanation: If check() returns false, increment() will never execute due to short-circuit evaluation, possibly leading to missed side effects. The distractor stating 'check() will never be called' is incorrect because it's always evaluated first. The notion that increment() will run twice is baseless, and short-circuiting does not disable all functions.
If you have the expression (userInput != null || validateInput(userInput)), what is true when userInput is not null?
Explanation: When userInput is not null, the first condition of the OR expression is true, so the second function is skipped because the result is already known. The distractor about an error is incorrect since nothing runs. Saying both are always executed ignores short-circuiting, while claiming userInput is always null is irrelevant.
Which outcome can occur when using a short-circuit condition in a loop, such as while (hasMore() u0026u0026 getNext())?
Explanation: If hasMore() returns false, getNext() is skipped due to short-circuit evaluation, potentially omitting an extra action in the loop. Stating getNext() always runs before hasMore() is incorrect, as hasMore() must be evaluated first. The loop can terminate, so that distractor is wrong, and the final option fails to account for short-circuit logic.