Jeanne Boyarsky

author & internet detective
+ Follow
since May 26, 2003
Jeanne likes ...
Eclipse IDE Java VI Editor
Forum Moderator
Jeanne Boyarsky currently moderates these forums:
New York
Cows and Likes
Cows
Total received
755
In last 30 days
28
Total given
99891
Likes
Total received
3999
Received in last 30 days
34
Total given
2875
Given in last 30 days
32
Forums and Threads
Scavenger Hunt
expand Rancher Scavenger Hunt Green check
expand Ranch Hand Scavenger Hunt Green check
expand Greenhorn Scavenger Hunt Green check

Recent posts by Jeanne Boyarsky

Campbell Ritchie wrote:The way the answer is printed isn't clear. It looks as though the correct answer is A D F B at first reading. A little formatting, maybe with more space before the B, would makee that clearer.


Agreed. We are now writing "option X" consistently which avoids this problem
Randy,
Yeah. I was slow to send them in.

Whether you get a paper book or e-book depends on the publisher and the country. I suspect Malaysia is a country that publisher do as e-book only because of shipping costs. (Most publishers to electronic only to India and that's a bigger country)
2 days ago
Many people use a build tool like the Maven shade plugin to create an uber jar

Tim:: Does one-ar work without Ant/Maven
2 days ago
Dave: It probably won't surprise you that we tested with Java 8 .

Dave/Piet: I added that to our to do list for the Java 11 book. Thanks for pointing it out. Knowing about it up front will make things faster for us.
Erik,.
My publisher figured it out! The "10 9 8 7 ..." countdown changed to a different system based on the printer. So it's a legit book and no worries there.

As for the content error: the book has an official errata page and an unofficial one. Scott and I maintain the unofficial one and it is more comprehensive. Somehow the error you describe got introduced to the official errata and a later printing "fixed" it. (The publisher is supposed to ask Scott or I to confirm errata; that got missed here.)

So mystery solved.

Ivana Kilibarda wrote:Thank you both for your answers
So, Jeanne, if I have similar question, I should go with more "specific" answer (as somewhat general rule for answering)?


Correct.

There aren't a ton, but there some "English ambiguous" questions on the exam. Often you can use the number of correct answers as a clue to intent. This one was not one of those cases alas .
Ivana,
Welcome to CodeRanch!

The intent of Option A is to be "Java doesn't allow multiple inheritance in any forum". It's there to make the answers mutually exclusive. Java does allow implementing multiple interfaces making Option D the answer.

On the real exam, there are some questions like this, but there are way more coding questions.
Thanks. I'm going to ask my publisher what this means. I'm baffled how there's a different copy of the book with different content.
Yes. We are working on it. We tried prodding the cows, but that didn't work. So we moved on to technical solutions.

We've added some performance metrics so we can see specifically what is causing the problem.

Please be patient.
1 week ago
Erik,
Welcome to CodeRanch!

I'm really curious what's going on here. Can you do two things?
1) Take a picture of that part of page 552 and either post it here or email it to me (jeanne at javaranch dot com). I'm curious how else it differs from my copy.
2) Right after the title page of the book (but before the dedication), there is a page with the copyright and a list of everyone who worked on the book. Can you let me know what it says for:
a) copyright (should be 2016)
b) the very last line (should be 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1)

I've attached what I see in my copy of the book. As you can see D is clearly incorrect in that. Which matches what we submitted to the publisher in the first place.


Campbell Ritchie wrote:

Jeanne Boyarsky wrote:. . .  They key point is that if the parent defines a constructor, the child needs to as well.

I presume that means constructors with arguments only. The subclass's constructor must then start this(something); or super(something); and it is the super(something); part that causes the problem in question.


Yes, that

Campbell Ritchie wrote:

Jeanne Boyarsky wrote:. . .  They key point is that if the parent defines a constructor, the child needs to as well.

I presume that means constructors with arguments only. The subclass's constructor must then start this(something); or super(something); and it is the super(something); part that causes the problem in question.


Yes, that
It's on page 243. That text is a bit confusing; we've re-written in the Java 11 version of the book. (which we are actively working on.)

We were trying to explain the error case where the parent doesn't have a no-argument constructor. (Yours does; just implicitly generated as the default constructor). They key point is that if the parent defines a constructor, the child needs to as well.

Write stuff done. Seriously make boxes and arrows as you go through the code.

Over time, you will be patterns/layers and get a feel for how the app is designed.
1 week ago