• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Who can justify SCJP2 appropriately?

 
Roger Chiang
Greenhorn
Posts: 19
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Sometimes, OK! just sometimes, when I think why we need to take the test? (TEST1, TEST2, TEST3,..) Basically the answer is quite clear than the real test. But, OK! just but, when I, or most of us, try to choose several books to read (for what? of course, for higher grade or at least for passing, right?!), I found it's wild that the Qs in the book from sun's web site (or, another one, like JQ+...) looks like twin with the real test. It means that buy this book (or, SW) it guarantee you'll pass the test, or even get a higher score. And they allow themselves make this kind of money, but do not allow us to circulate the Qs from our ancentors...!? (They do not allow us to make use of Information Technology to be IT programmer. Is it ridiculus?!) Does that mean..., OK! just does that mean, if through commercial behaviour, we can circulate our ancestors' harvest. If this is the CASE, HI! MY DEAR ANCESTORS!!!, Pleeeese SEND YOUR SWEET Qs TO ME, I'LL COllECT IT FOR YOU AND MAKE PROFIT AND LET'S SHARE!!!
Here, I want to ASK: Who can justify SCJP2 appropriately?
 
Jane Griscti
Ranch Hand
Posts: 3141
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi Roger,
Well, first off, I hope no one is buying books and doing mocks just to pass the test Hopefully, it's because they want to really understand the language so they can become better programmer's.
As to justifying why anyone should become an SCJP2 ... why does it need justifying?? No one's forcing any of us to get certified (well, maybe the odd person is being requested to by their employer). If you don't want to become an SCJP, then don't. If you need some compelling reason to take the time to study; maybe now isn't the right time for you be thinking of it or you could read this article http://javaboutique.internet.com/articles/Certification/ to help you get motivated.
On the other hand, if you just want someone to give you the answers ... why should they give you an easy ride when they've all worked hard to learn the language themselves!

------------------
Jane Griscti
Sun Certified Programmer for the Java� 2 Platform
 
Roger Chiang
Greenhorn
Posts: 19
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Ho! Dear Jane:
I'm very appreciated that, at least, you very understood that everybody is work very hard. Why do they work hard is still much clear than real SCJP test. However, you didn't catch my point. Even though we cram different sources (pretty close to each other), we do really preparing to be a good Java Programmer, though not to be a good bartender or nanny. However, I believe, SCJP test made changed and made a "little" twist to play much more tricks than ever. It's not what we want. It wastes our time to prepare "not to be trapped". Otherwise, any graduated students from University should be easy to pass, why still so many failed? So, it becomes training certers' business. (Though we can choose to the center or not.) Otherwise, should you say education in colleges or universities are not qualified?
Therefore, except those who are beginners to Java, I should not be wrong if I say get certificate just cerfiticate, it "also" proves you how good you have dealt with tricks or traps...
So, let me clear it, SCJP should test people the basic knowledge of Java and good programming style of thinking and behavior, (and with one test will be enough! This is design problem.) it's not necessary to play tricks. (or second test to make their own profit.) Life is too short, I would like to save time to play with code instead of cramming my head for tricks.
I would be glad to hear from anybody...
------------------
Sun Certified Java Programmer 2
[This message has been edited by Roger Chiang (edited March 14, 2001).]
 
Rosie Vogel
Ranch Hand
Posts: 229
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hello Roger,
So, let me clear it, SCJP should test people the basic knowledge of Java and good programming style of thinking and behavior

In my opinion, the exam does exactly that. It is hard (for most people anyway), but not tricky.
 
Roger Chiang
Greenhorn
Posts: 19
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi! Dear Rosie:
_____________________________________________________
It is hard (for most people anyway), but not tricky.
_____________________________________________________
So you meant:
>>> SCJP{
XXXX tricky = ... ;
Hard hard != tricky;
}
is your conclusion, right?
What do you think hard is?
There are two kinds of hard Qs, I believed. One is the Qs we have a ambiguous impression or never touched; another one is the Qs we have ever touched but being twisted and the test misleads us to believe the wrong statement which being transformed. It's personal problem for previous one. However, I don't believe that that is not the trick can make the Qs hard for the second one.
Therefore, if your conclusion is wrong, then this:
>>> SCJP{
XXXX tricky = ...;
Hard hard = tricky;
}
should be RIGHT! even
" Hard hard = (Hard) tricky; " is unnecessary. What do you think "XXXX" is?

I would like to hear more voice from anyone...
[This message has been edited by Roger Chiang (edited March 14, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Roger Chiang (edited March 15, 2001).]
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic