• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Ron McLeod
  • Paul Clapham
  • Liutauras Vilda
Sheriffs:
  • paul wheaton
  • Rob Spoor
  • Devaka Cooray
Saloon Keepers:
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
  • Frits Walraven
  • Tim Moores
Bartenders:
  • Mikalai Zaikin

Question 19, Chapter 6 Discussion

 
Greenhorn
Posts: 4
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Shouldn't it be correct?



It says:

You Answered Incorrectly.
The Reptile class defines a constructor, but it is not a no-argument constructor. Therefore, the Lizard constructor must explicitly call super(), passing in an int value. For this reason, line 9 does not compile, and option F is the correct answer. If the Lizard class were corrected to call the appropriate super() constructor, then the program would print BALizard at runtime, with the static initializer running first, followed by the instance initializer, and finally the method call using the overridden method.



Because if I just erase line 3 the compilation goes well.

I mean, it could be it's ambiguous. Maybe a better option would be:

It will throw a compilation error at line 3.


And then it would be clearer and the correct response would be F for sure.
 
Bartender
Posts: 3918
43
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I fully agree with you. Option E is correct, and option F is wrong.

P.S. Welcome to CodeRanch !

 
Fabricio Yamamoto
Greenhorn
Posts: 4
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Mikalai Zaikin wrote:I fully agree with you. Option E is correct, and option F is wrong.

P.S. Welcome to CodeRanch !



Thanks!
 
Sheriff
Posts: 9708
43
Android Google Web Toolkit Hibernate IntelliJ IDE Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I agree with you Fabricio, the question is ambiguous. The compilation error is not on line 3, but to me the error/mistake is more on line 9 where hatch is not passed to super constructor.
 
Master Rancher
Posts: 4910
74
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Yeah - the problem is that line 3 and line 9 are not compatible.  One or the other needs to change.  But from the compiler's perspective, line 3 is fine on its own, but when it gets to line 9, that's when the incompatibility is discovered.  So line 9 gets the blame.
 
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic