i am in a class and find C++ a challenge. i have an assignment and this is what i have so far. i need help, because i am not too analytical.

#include <cstdlib>
#include <ctime>
#include <iostream>
using std::cout;
using std::endl;
int main()
{
int (a, b);
int (a * b ) = result;
int result;


srand( (unsigned)time( NULL ) ); //set seed to sys time
for (int i = 1; i < 2; i++)
{
cout << 1 + rand() % (10 - 1 + 1)<< endl;
cout << 1 + rand() % (10 - 1 + 1)<< endl;//how do i put side beside each other with X's sign
}
return 0;
}
cin >> c
if (int a * int b) = int c
getline int c//do i need this
cout << "" ", is the correct answer."


if  c != (int a * int c)
getline int c
cout << "" ", is not the correct answer."
// loop to try again
//option to exit either way

Use rand() to produce two positive one-digit integers.
The program should then output a question using the numbers.
The student then types the answer. The program checks the students answer.
If it is correct, print Very good!, and ask another multiplication question.
If the answer is wrong, print No. Please try again., and let the student
try the same question repeatedly until the student gets it right.

should i use calling or pass by value?

Edited 3 Years Ago by deceptikon: Fixed formatting

my c++ is a little rusty, stupid java!
I don't know what 'calling' is, but you shouldn't need to pass anything.

DO
int a = some random number
int b = some random number
int product = a*b;
int answer = 0;
bool correct = false;
 
while (!correct)
	cout <<"What is "<<a<<" times "<<b<<"?";
	cin >> answer;
 
	if (answer == product)
		correct = true;
	else
	   correct = false;
 
	if (!correct)
		cout<<"Please try again.";
	else
		cout<<"Good job!";
LOOP

I think I even mixed BASIC in there as well. You should get the idea though. I think you're trying to make this way more difficult than it needs to be.

thank you. i forgot about the bolean functions. that will make it easier. it will try to build this and make it work.
thanks phaelax

This article has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.