• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Some possible errata in OCP Sybex's book  RSS feed

 
Tomas Castagnino
Ranch Hand
Posts: 31
3
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Hello all!

In page 140, in table 3.7 it says that in Maps and Sets the elements are not ordered. However, TreeSet and TreeMap both sort their elements, and since I think that sorting implies ordering the table's statement may not be completely accurate. 

In Chapter 4, page 187, table 4.3, I think that the question marks in “For Intermediate Operations?” and “For Terminal Operations?” might be redundant or lead to confusion (in me, at least). Because there is already a “?” in each scenario. Just a suggestion.

Finally, in page 201, bellow “Before you say that it is harder to read, we can format it:”, I believe it has to be:

list.stream()
.filter(n-> n.length() == 4)
.sorted()


instead of:

stream.filter(n-> ...)


That's it.

Thanks!
 
Jeanne Boyarsky
author & internet detective
Sheriff
Posts: 37395
531
Eclipse IDE Java VI Editor
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Tomas Castagnino wrote:In page 140, in table 3.7 it says that in Maps and Sets the elements are not ordered. However, TreeSet and TreeMap both sort their elements, and since I think that sorting implies ordering the table's statement may not be completely accurate. 

The table is not an errata. It is an important distinction. The Map and Set interfaces do *not* provide ordering. If the exam asks you about an interface that orders elements, the answer is List or Queue. If the exam asks about a class, it is a different story. That's cover in table 3.8. Read carefully on the exam. You don't want to get a question wrong because you were thinking about implementations when asked about an interface!

Tomas Castagnino wrote:In Chapter 4, page 187, table 4.3, I think that the question marks in “For Intermediate Operations?” and “For Terminal Operations?” might be redundant or lead to confusion (in me, at least). Because there is already a “?” in each scenario. Just a suggestion.

Hmm. Mixed feelings on that one. I definitely see your point and added it to the list of things to consider changing if we update the book for Java 9.

Tomas Castagnino wrote:Finally, in page 201, bellow “Before you say that it is harder to read, we can format it:”, I believe it has to be:

list.stream()

That one is definitely an errata! Adding to the list.
 
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!