A programmer for a weather website needs to display the proportion of days with freezing temperatures in a given month. Their algorithm will operate on a list of temperatures for each day in the month. It must keep track of how many temperatures are below or equal to 32. Once it's done processing the list, it must display the ratio of freezing days over total days.
Which of these correctly expresses that algorithm in pseudocode?
A.
numFreezing ← 0

numDays ← 0

FOR EACH temp IN temps {

IF (temp ≤ 32) {

numFreezing ← numFreezing + 1

}

numDays ← numDays + 1

DISPLAY(numFreezing/numDays)

}

B.
numFreezing ← 0

numDays ← 0

FOR EACH temp IN temps {

IF (temp ≤ 32) {

numFreezing ← numFreezing + 1

}

numDays ← numDays + 1

}

DISPLAY(numFreezing/numDays)

C.
numFreezing ← 0

numDays ← 0

FOR EACH temp IN temps {

IF (temp < 32) {

numFreezing ← numFreezing + 1

}

numDays ← numDays + 1

}

DISPLAY(numFreezing/numDays)

D.
numFreezing ← 0

numDays ← 0

FOR EACH temp IN temps {

IF (temp ≤ 32) {

numFreezing ← numFreezing + 1

numDays ← numDays + 1

}

}

DISPLAY(numFreezing/numDays)

B.

Explanation:

The correct Pseudocode for this scenario would be B. This code makes two variables for the number of total days (numDays) and number of freezing days (numFreezing). Then it loops through the entire data set and checks if each temp is less than or equal to 32 degrees. If it is, it adds it to numFreezing, if it is not then it skips this step, but still adds 1 to the total number of days after each loop. Once the entire loop is done it prints out the ratio, unlike answer A which prints out the ratio for every iteration of the loop.

numFreezing ← 0

numDays ← 0

FOR EACH temp IN temps {

IF (temp ≤ 32) {

numFreezing ← numFreezing + 1

}

numDays ← numDays + 1

}

DISPLAY(numFreezing/numDays)

the benefits of raising bc’s minimum wage to $15 through a

series of pre-announced staged increases far outweigh the likely

costs. claims that such an increase will lead to massive job losses

in low-wage sectors of the economy are not credible.

• an increase to $15 would result in some job losses. however,

the likely impact is less than a 1 per cent reduction in the overall

provincial employment rate, and a 7.6 per cent reduction in the

employment rate for those currently making between $10.25

and $15 per hour.

• the large job loss impacts predicted by some opponents of

minimum wages misrepresent the existing economic research. in

reading and using that research, it is important to recognize that

estimates showing job loss effects of minimum wage increases

apply only to teenagers. estimated effects for young adult and

adult workers range from insignificant to non-existent.

• focusing on teenage workers plays up an inaccurate stereotype

about who earns very low wages in bc and leads to exaggerated

claims about job losses. only 26 per cent of those currently making

between $10.25 and $12 are teenagers, and only 5 per cent

of those making between $12 and $15 are teenagers.