Campbell Ritchie wrote:
Would we even tell you? Mwaahaahaahaa.
And thank you for sorting out my quotes, Ernest.
Larry Olson wrote:Thanks for pointing that out. I wasn't aware of that since I was looking into 1.5+. Is it important to understand how 1.5+ is different from the previous versions if one is preparing for SCJP 1.6? Is that a worthwhile exercise?
Larry Olson wrote: though it's return type could be a sub-type of the return type of the original method.