A
Andy Dingley
Not really. It was obviously intended as a topic-killer
That would be why I copied-and-pasted it from our HR policies wiki.
This is a genuine policy here!
Not really. It was obviously intended as a topic-killer
certification is an added advantage.It will be always useful .
who are we to dictate terms.
Andy Dingley said:If I interviewed someone with A+, I ought to fail myself!
_We're_ the people recruiting and interviewing for the jobs.
Date: 6 Feb 2007 01:28:58 -0800
From: "(e-mail address removed)" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Java Certification Exam QueryHi AK,
Just one thing i want to say to you that you must look at once the
java specification tutorial before appearing in the exam.
You can get it fromhttp://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/second_edition.
Because it will tell you a lot of things that you may not be knowing.
Thanks Agarwal, Will definitely go through that.
For an example just tell the output of the following program :-
class Super {
Super() {
printThree();
}
void printThree() {
System.out.println("three");
}
}
class Test extends Super {
int three = (int)Math.PI; // That is, 3
public static void main(String[] args){
Test t = new Test();
t.printThree();
}
void printThree() { System.out.println(three); }
}
This question sure seems to be a toughie. Let me go ahead reasoning rather
than jumping to answers. The object t is calling the function prinThree().
In a normal case the subclass function function is called and the value 3
is printed. but here the object for the superclass is first created and
hence its cosntructor is called which inturn calls its own printThree()
function. So first "three" is printed first and then ater the object is
created the subclasses' function is called.
the output should be
"three"
3
correct me if I am wrong
kind regards
AK
For an example just tell the output of the following program :-
class Super {
Super() {
printThree();
}
void printThree() {
System.out.println("three");
}
}
class Test extends Super {
int three = (int)Math.PI; // That is, 3
public static void main(String[] args){
Test t = new Test();
t.printThree();
}
void printThree() { System.out.println(three); }
}
the output should be
"three"
3
correct me if I am wrong
Andy said:Most of "recruitment" is sadly about avoiding
idiots in favour of the acceptably competent, not about selecting the
very best people. For "best" I'd only trust long personal experience
of that one candidate, or similar experience of colleagues who'd
worked with them before.
If I were putting a start-up together, then I'd want the very best
people (not many of them) and I'd recruit solely by personal
recommendation of who was really good. If I'm trying to find 3 more
warm bodies for a gas-bill shop, then I'd just only recruit certified
programmers.
AK said:thats a valid point. its always to have something rather than npothing.
but my query was if it was really worth the effort and time. and the
unanimous answer has been YES.
For an example just tell the output of the following program :-
class Super {
Super() {
printThree();
}
void printThree() {
System.out.println("three");
}
}
class Test extends Super {
int three = (int)Math.PI; // That is, 3
public static void main(String[] args){
Test t = new Test();
t.printThree();
}
void printThree() { System.out.println(three); }
}the output should be
"three"
3
correct me if I am wrong
Juwt
three
not
3
There is no way to call the "same" method twice; only one version is
invoked.
For an example just tell the output of the following program :-
class Super {
Super() {
printThree();
}
void printThree() {
System.out.println("three");
}
}
class Test extends Super {
int three = (int)Math.PI; // That is, 3
public static void main(String[] args){
Test t = new Test();
t.printThree();
}
void printThree() { System.out.println(three); }
}
Thomas said:That's too bad (you'll end up with people no better than you deserve ;-)
I do agree with your point of view that one should refrain from using the SMS-CHAT lingo of i,ur,coz etc but at the same time I feel one should not force ones opinions opinions on ohters.We live in a democratic world and USENET is an example of that. And the only thing thats permanent in life is change. If the majority of the people want the language to change,adapt and improve with time; who are we to dictate terms.
kind regards
AK and I were both wrong. (e-mail address removed) is right.
Yup!..I too missed the first one -- the child-class method being called.
I finally broke down and did what I should've done in the first place and ran
the durn thing.
- Lew
Proton said:Hi Lew,
I didnt know this group is working professionally...In future, there
wont be any informal communication..
Thanks...
Moin
AK said:Andy,Thomas & Lew,
I completely agree with what you have to say. The only point I was
trying to make was that people have the right to commit mistakes and
learn the *hard* way.
Lew said:I agree that people have the right to learn the hard way, but I see no
reason to require that they do so. Passing along information to make it
possible to avoid mistakes and learn the easy way is my goal.
Chris Uppal said:Lew wrote:
One (partial) definition of communication: learning from other people's
mistakes...
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.