J
JavaEnquirer
Our organisation recently recieved a two day Java training course from
an external consultancy. Myself aside, most of the attendees were
unfamiliar with Java and OO. I have been away from Java for 2 years or
so, and am a little rusty. However, I felt disturbed by many of the
things that he repeatedly asserted as fact, despite my attempts to pose
alternative views. Which of us is lacking?
1. Java is pass by reference.
2. String s1 = "Fred" is always the same as String s1 = new
String("Fred")
3. Never heard of SpringLayout
4. Never heard of the EventHandler utility class and couldn't see why
it would be useful when explained to him. He also asserted that you
should only ever use inner classes as event handlers and saw no reason
for using Swing Actions.
5. His presentation slides stated that you should never modify/extend
any of the base Swing components.
6. Stated that you should only ever use GUI builder tools and that hand
coding was a no-no.
7. Never heard of JDBC RowSet or any of its subinterfaces.
8. Stated that if you do not use GridbagLayout your GUI will look
appaling and developing it will be unmanageable.
9. Stated that GridBagLayout could do things that other layout managers
couldn't do ( even in combination )
10. Though currently writing a book on Java 1.5, he didn't know the
syntax for a simple generics example e.g List<String> myString etc. I
had to help him out.
11. Stated that you can not develop Swing applications using a GUI
builder plug-in with Eclipse.
12. Though using Eclipse as his training IDE, he was unaware whether or
not any version of Eclipse was up-to-speed with generics.
13. Stated that the class Class was the base class for all classes ( as
opposed to Object being the base class for all objects )
14. Repeatedly described static initialisers as static constructors.
15. Asserted that any Java 2 applets deployed in internet explorer must
be launched via an ActiveX control.
I do not expect a consultant to get everything right all of the time.
However, when paying several thousands of pounds ( more in US dollars )
for a consultant with 10 years Java experience, and currently
co-writing a book on Java 1.5 with a well-known, established author, a
better quality of service should have been delivered. Please help as
I'm beginning to question my own judgements! In fairness, he did
partially back-track on some of his assertions after some uncomfortable
moments. In the interest of fairness I won't mention any names and I
hope I have represented the training course accurately.
an external consultancy. Myself aside, most of the attendees were
unfamiliar with Java and OO. I have been away from Java for 2 years or
so, and am a little rusty. However, I felt disturbed by many of the
things that he repeatedly asserted as fact, despite my attempts to pose
alternative views. Which of us is lacking?
1. Java is pass by reference.
2. String s1 = "Fred" is always the same as String s1 = new
String("Fred")
3. Never heard of SpringLayout
4. Never heard of the EventHandler utility class and couldn't see why
it would be useful when explained to him. He also asserted that you
should only ever use inner classes as event handlers and saw no reason
for using Swing Actions.
5. His presentation slides stated that you should never modify/extend
any of the base Swing components.
6. Stated that you should only ever use GUI builder tools and that hand
coding was a no-no.
7. Never heard of JDBC RowSet or any of its subinterfaces.
8. Stated that if you do not use GridbagLayout your GUI will look
appaling and developing it will be unmanageable.
9. Stated that GridBagLayout could do things that other layout managers
couldn't do ( even in combination )
10. Though currently writing a book on Java 1.5, he didn't know the
syntax for a simple generics example e.g List<String> myString etc. I
had to help him out.
11. Stated that you can not develop Swing applications using a GUI
builder plug-in with Eclipse.
12. Though using Eclipse as his training IDE, he was unaware whether or
not any version of Eclipse was up-to-speed with generics.
13. Stated that the class Class was the base class for all classes ( as
opposed to Object being the base class for all objects )
14. Repeatedly described static initialisers as static constructors.
15. Asserted that any Java 2 applets deployed in internet explorer must
be launched via an ActiveX control.
I do not expect a consultant to get everything right all of the time.
However, when paying several thousands of pounds ( more in US dollars )
for a consultant with 10 years Java experience, and currently
co-writing a book on Java 1.5 with a well-known, established author, a
better quality of service should have been delivered. Please help as
I'm beginning to question my own judgements! In fairness, he did
partially back-track on some of his assertions after some uncomfortable
moments. In the interest of fairness I won't mention any names and I
hope I have represented the training course accurately.