フリー問題

問題文

Two questions about run-time detail remain. The first is which box goes dead once an attribute's comparison is set to be settled at run time, and which becomes the place where the wording is then supplied. The second is which family of code has its values turned into the matching kinds for you, and which leaves that turning to the person writing it. Which pairing is right?

選択肢

1. Once an attribute's comparison is set to be settled at run time the stage's own entry goes dead while the model's own entry becomes the place where the wording is then supplied, and the managed language has its values turned into the matching kinds for you while the scripted language leaves that turning to the person writing it.
2. Once an attribute's comparison is set to be settled at run time the model's own entry goes dead while the stage's own entry becomes the place where the wording is then supplied, and the managed language has its values turned into the matching kinds for you while the scripted language leaves that turning to the person writing it.
3. Once an attribute's comparison is set to be settled at run time the stage's own entry goes dead while the model's own entry becomes the place where the wording is then supplied, and the scripted language has its values turned into the matching kinds for you while the managed language leaves that turning to the person writing it.
4. Once an attribute's comparison is set to be settled at run time the model's own entry goes dead while the stage's own entry becomes the place where the wording is then supplied, and the scripted language has its values turned into the matching kinds for you while the managed language leaves that turning to the person writing it.