Java OCP 11 Developer Complete Study Guide errata

[Rade Koncar]

Hi,

on page 69, kindle version, it says: Numeric literals can begin with 1–9, 0, 0x, 0X, 0b, and 0B, with the latter four indicating a change of numeric base.
What about octal numbers? 0 also can indicate change of numeric base, right?

[Rade Koncar]

Also on page 538: Instantiating an inner class requires an instance of the outer class, such as calling new Outer.new Inner().

It is strange that Outer refers to the instance, Capitalized names often indicate a type.

[Edmund Yong]

Rade Koncar wrote:Also on page 538: Instantiating an inner class requires an instance of the outer class, such as calling new Outer.new Inner().

It is strange that Outer refers to the instance, Capitalized names often indicate a type.

"Outer" refers the type, not the instance. The instance is "new Outer()".

[Rade Koncar]

Oh yes thanks

[Campbell Ritchie]

Rade Koncar wrote:. . . with the latter four indicating a change of numeric base. . . .

Please confirm the exact details of the book: is it Boyarsky and Selikoff? Please check here whether that has already been reported as an error; I didn't find it.
I think it would read better as,

. . with the latter five indicating a change of numeric base. . . .

[Rade Koncar]

Campbell Ritchie wrote:

Rade Koncar wrote:. . . with the latter four indicating a change of numeric base. . . .

Please confirm the exact details of the book: is it Boyarsky and Selikoff? Please check here whether that has already been reported as an error; I didn't find it.
I think it would read better as,

. . with the latter five indicating a change of numeric base. . . .

Latter five would indicate that 0 is octal zero, and octal zero is in fact 00.
I think the best thing would be to rephrase the whole thing

this is a copy/paste from my kindle:

Numeric literals can begin with 1–9, 0, 0x, 0X, 0b, and 0B, with the latter four indicating a change of numeric base.
Boyarsky, Jeanne. OCP Oracle Certified Professional Java SE 11 Developer Complete Study Guide (p. 70). Wiley. Kindle Edition.

[Campbell Ritchie]

Rade Koncar wrote:. . . Latter five would indicate that 0 is octal zero, and octal zero is in fact 00. . . . .

My, that is precise! I would have taken literals starting 0 as octal but you are correct about 0.
Even worse about octal: If you use underscores, how many of the following are valid integer literals?
1_234 01_234 0_1234 _01234 0b_0000_1111 0b0000_1111 0xffff_ffff 0x_ffff_ffff
It does say in the Java® Language Specification (=JLS) that the difference between 0, 00, 0x0, 000, and 0b0 doesn't “[matter] much in practice”.

[Rade Koncar]

all I'm gonna say is int O_O = 0_0;

[Campbell Ritchie]

O