【判断题】
在Python中定义类时实例方法的第一个参数名称不管是什么,都表示对象自身。
查看试卷,进入试卷练习
微信扫一扫,开始刷题
相关试题
【判断题】
Python代码可以内嵌在asp文件中。
【判断题】
无法配置IIS来支持Python程序的运行。
【判断题】
Python标准库os中的方法startfile()可以用来打开外部程序或文件,系统会自动关联相应的程序来打开或执行指定的文件。
【判断题】
在编写应用程序时,应合理控制线程数量,线程并不是越多越好。
【判断题】
在多线程编程时,当某子线程的daemon属性为False时,主线程结束时会检测该子线程是否结束,如果该子线程尚未运行结束,则主线程会等待它完成后再退出。
【判断题】
Python只能使用内置数据库SQLite,无法访问MS SQLServer、ACCESS或Oracle、MySQL等数据库。
【判断题】
使用OpenGL画图时,画点是最基本的操作,具体生成的图形由glBegin()函数指定的mode来决定。例如,mode值为GL_TRIANGLES时表示将要绘制三角形。
【判断题】
OpenGL采用的“状态机”工作方式,一旦设置了某种状态以后,除非显式修改该状态,否则该状态将一直保持。
【判断题】
假设os模块已导入,那么列表推导式 [filename for filename in os.listdir(‘C:\Windows’) if filename.endswith(‘.exe’)] 的作用是列出C:\Windows文件夹中所有扩展名为.exe的文件。
【判断题】
表达式 list(‘[1, 2, 3]’) 的值是[1, 2, 3]。
【判断题】
在函数内部没有任何声明的情况下直接为某个变量赋值,这个变量一定是函数内部的局部变量。
【判断题】
定义类时如果实现了contains()方法,该类对象即可支持成员测试运算in。
【判断题】
定义类时如果实现了len()方法,该类对象即可支持内置函数len()。
【判断题】
定义类时实现了eq()方法,该类对象即可支持运算符==。
【判断题】
定义类时实现了pow()方法,该类对象即可支持运算符**。
【判断题】
使用普通文本编辑器软件也可以正常查看二进制文件的内容。
【判断题】
二进制文件也可以使用记事本或其他文本编辑器打开,但是一般来说无法正常查看其中的内容。
【判断题】
Python标准库os中的方法isfile()可以用来测试给定的路径是否为文件。
【判断题】
Python标准库os中的方法exists()可以用来测试给定路径的文件是否存在。
【判断题】
Python标准库os中的方法isdir()可以用来测试给定的路径是否为文件夹。
【判断题】
Python标准库os中的方法listdir()返回包含指定路径中所有文件和文件夹名称的列表。
【判断题】
Python扩展库xlwt支持对Excel 2003或更低版本的Excel文件进行写操作。
【判断题】
Python扩展库xlrd支持对Excel 2003或更低版本的Excel文件进行读操作。
【判断题】
带有else子句的异常处理结构,如果不发生异常则执行else子句中的代码。
【判断题】
异常处理结构也不是万能的,处理异常的代码也有引发异常的可能。
【判断题】
在异常处理结构中,不论是否发生异常,finally子句中的代码总是会执行的。
【判断题】
在Python中定义函数时不需要声明函数参数的类型。
【判断题】
在Python中定义函数时不需要声明函数的返回值类型。
【判断题】
在函数中没有任何办法可以通过形参来影响实参的值。
【判断题】
已知 x = 3,那么执行语句 x+=6 之后,x的内存地址不变。
【判断题】
已知x为非空字符串,那么表达式 ”.join(x.split()) == x 的值一定为True。
【判断题】
已知x为非空字符串,那么表达式 ‘,’.join(x.split(‘,’)) == x 的值一定为True。
【判断题】
在Python中可以使用 for 作为变量名。
【判断题】
在Python中可以使用 id 作为变量名,尽管不建议这样做。
【判断题】
一个数字5也是合法的Python表达式。
【判断题】
同一个列表对象中的元素类型可以各不相同。
【判断题】
同一个列表对象中所有元素必须为相同类型。
【判断题】
已知x为非空列表,那么执行语句x[0] = 3之后,列表对象x的内存地址不变。
推荐试题
【单选题】
有的哲学家说,在大风扬起的尘土中,每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___
A. 辩证唯物主义决定论的观点
B. 形而上学的机械决定论的观点
C. 唯心主义非决定论的观点
D. 庸俗唯物主义的观点
【单选题】
“或然率”是指___
A. 可能性在质上的一种科学说明和测定
B. 可能性在量上的一种科学说明和测定
C. 必然性的一种科学说明和判定
D. 偶然性的一种科学说明和测定
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___
A. It is based on questionable statistics.
B. It reflects the economic changes.
C. It evidences the improved welfare.
D. It provides much food for thought.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It is widely used to compare the economic growth across countries.
B. It revolutionizes the way of measuring ordinary people’s livelihood.
C. It focuses on people’s consumption rather that their average income.
D. It is a more comprehensive measure of people’s economic well-being.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___
A. It reflected the existing big gap between the two economies.
B. It neglected many important indicators of people’s welfare.
C. It covered up the differences between individual citizens.
D. It failed to count in their difference in natural resources.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It can accurately pinpoint a country’s current economic problems.
B. It can help to raise people’s awareness of their economic well-being.
C. It can diagnose the causes of a country’s slowing pace of economic improvement.
D. It can compare a country’s economic conditions between different periods of time.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___
A. It is much better than that of their European counterparts.
B. It has been on the decline ever since the turn of the century.
C. It has not improved as much as reported by the Census Bureau.
D. It has not been accurately assessed and reported since mid-2000s.
【单选题】
大学生的成才目标是___。
A. 培养德智体美全面发展的人才
B. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者
C. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者和接班人
D. 培养专业化、创新化的人才
【单选题】
世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。
A. “多极化”
B. 单边主义
C. 两极格局形成
D. 一超独霸
【单选题】
在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可,统一存在的,其中处于主导地位的是___。
【单选题】
时代精神的内涵十分丰富,其中___居于核心地位。
A. 艰苦奋斗
B. 自强不息
C. 团结统一
D. 改革创新
【单选题】
民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。
A. 爱国主义
B. 人道主义
C. 科学主义
D. 革命英雄主义
【单选题】
下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。
A. 艰难困苦,玉汝于成
B. 先天下之忧而忧
C. 生于忧患,死于安乐
D. 民无信不立
【单选题】
10。___是我们立党立国的根本指导思想
A. 马克思主义
B. 社会主义荣辱观
C. 社会主义思想道德
D. 爱国主义11. 当代大学生的历史使命是(A)
【单选题】
衡量大学生全面发展的一个重要标准是___
A. 知识渊博
B. 品质高尚
C. 德才兼备
D. 知行统一
【单选题】
独立生活意识指___
A. 自己的事情自己处理不需要别人管
B. 自己想干什么就干什么
C. 树立自信、自律、自立、自强的精神
D. 天马行空独来独往
【单选题】
___作为社会主义核心价值体系的精髓,解决的是应当具备什么样的精神状态和精神风貌的问题。
A. 马克思主义的指导地位
B. 中国特色社会主义的共同理想
C. 民族精神和时代精神
D. 社会主义荣辱观
【单选题】
人们对生活在其中的世界及人与世界的关系的总的看法和根本观点就是___
A. 世界观
B. 人生观
C. 价值观
D. 历史观
【单选题】
人生观的核心是___
A. 人生意义
B. 人生目的
C. 人生态度
D. 人生价值
【单选题】
人的本质属性是___
A. 自然属性
B. 自私自利
C. 社会属性
D. 趋利避害
【单选题】
社会主义社会人生价值标准是___
A. 是否拥有金钱财富
B. 自我价值实现的程度
C. 宗教信仰是否虔诚
D. 是否为人民群众尽心尽力服务
【单选题】
回答人为什么活着___
A. 人生态度
B. 人生目的
C. 人生价值
D. 人生意义
【单选题】
表明人应当怎样对待生活___
A. 人生态度
B. 人生目的
C. 人生价值
D. 人生意义
【单选题】
判别什么样的人生才有意义___
A. 人生态度
B. 人生目的
C. 人生价值
D. 价值取向
【单选题】
下列人生态度中正确的是___
A. 认真务实
B. 看破红尘
C. 悲观消沉
D. 满足于现状
【单选题】
下列属于正确的人生目的的是___
A. 追求享乐
B. 为人民服务
C. 追求金钱
D. 追求个人利益
【单选题】
___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.
A. 享乐主义人生观
B. 拜金主义人生观
C. 功利主义人生观
D. 个人主义人生观
【单选题】
___ 认为,社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。
A. 享乐主义人生观
B. 拜金主义人生观
C. 功利主义人生观
D. 个人主义人生观
【单选题】
___认为,人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。
A. 享乐主义人生观
B. 拜金主义人生观
C. 功利主义人生观
D. 个人主义人生观
【单选题】
马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___
A. 《关于费尔巴哈的提纲》
B. 《共产党宣言》
C. 《劳动在才从猿到人转变过程中的作用》D《论黑格尔哲学》
【单选题】
人与自然关系的实质是___
A. 人与人的关系,是社会关系
B. 人对于自然的利用和占有
C. 自然必须服务于人类社会的发展
D. 人与物的占有与被占有的关系
【单选题】
在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___
A. 职业道德
B. 道德
C. 社会公德
D. 家庭美德
【单选题】
社会公德最基本的要求是___
A. 文明礼貌
B. 遵纪守法
C. 保护环境
D. 助人为乐
【单选题】
通过其规定和实施,影响人们思想,培养和提高人们法律意识,引导人们依法行为的作用是法律的___
A. 指引作用
B. 预测作用
C. 评价作用
D. 教育作用
【单选题】
有序的公共生活是构建和谐社会的___
A. 重要条件
B. 重要作用
C. 重要标志
D. 重要原则
【单选题】
一行人在过路口时迎面遇到红灯,看到近处没有车辆便径直通过。他这样做是___
A. 节省时间之举
B. 聪明灵活之举
C. 可供学习之举
D. 不遵守交通规则,违反社会公德之举