Jennifer Warren

Ranch Hand
+ Follow
since Aug 24, 2001
Cows and Likes
Cows
Total received
0
In last 30 days
0
Total given
0
Likes
Total received
0
Received in last 30 days
0
Total given
0
Given in last 30 days
0
Forums and Threads
Scavenger Hunt
expand Ranch Hand Scavenger Hunt
expand Greenhorn Scavenger Hunt

Recent posts by Jennifer Warren

Farrukh, if that is the case why u have the value of i as 4 rather than 3.
for me it is 3+4+5=12.
Jennifer.
try doing this (byte)(0x81 >>2);
check out the result.
Jennifer.
Further, to that if u can get hold of Khalid Mughal's book. Its the best book to prepare for certification.
Jennifer.
In my exam I/O and Component were covered as there were quite a few questions on them. As far as Painting is concered I did cover it and also I didn't find any question on them in the exam.
For Exam need to go through Khalid Mughal's book before u go and sit in the exam. Lot of folks might differ with me on that but that is what I feel. It did help me alot.
Jennifer.
It is working fine on jdk1.3.
Jennifer.
If there is no explicit call made in the code to the super the implicit call is always made to the super(); contructor. As in the constructor public DerivedDemo( int x, int y), the first line compiler check if it is a call for the super() or any this() for the constructor for the super class and the same class. Which is not there so compiler puts a call to the super of no parameter constructor.
Further,public DerivedDemo( int x), in this contructor in the body the first line calls the super classes same parameter constructor so that is why the answer is B and C rather than A and B.
I hope it helps.
Jennifer.
I tried both they are working fine. Need to check the way ur running or compiling it.
Which JDK version are u using.
Thanks.
Jennifer.
Answer is e). Compilation error.
As the main methods return type is void and here in the code on line 7 return 0; will give u an error.
Further, one can never be sure that when Garbage collector will be invoked as it is a low priority thread.

Jennifer.
Hello Guys!,
Today i did my exam and i got 89%, not sure is good or ok but thing is that I've done it and was not that though as i was expecting after going through the Mughal's book.
Well I would post some info regarding the test later.
If some one interested in asking any thing in particular you are more than welcome.
Jennifer.
19 years ago
do a little change in ur code and see it yourself.
char A = '\u0005';
char B = 5;
if (A==B)
System.out.println("Equal "+ A +" " +B);
else
System.out.println("Not equal");
A = '\u0025';
B = 25;
if (A==B)
System.out.println("Equal ");
else
System.out.println("Not equal"+ A +" " +B);

Hope it explains.
Jennifer.
thanks Shyam,
i was out of town and could not check it any earlier. But, I should say I did went through all and I still feel that compiler should have been privided with enough information to detect these too with the complain of un-reachanle statement.
Well, I guess I'll have to live with it.
regards to all.
Jennifer.
no I mean if(true)return;
and the statements after that would never be executed. If the compiler has enough information to figure out while(false){} and tells that the statements or statement in the body of while statement is not reachable. Why not it figures out in the if statement that it will always return and as in your code int i=0; will never be reached.
I do understand the use of boolean it was just that i feel that compiler should know this too.
thanx.
Jennifer.
Sorry i forgot to mention one thing;
return;// not like this but
if(true)return;
once again sorry,
Jennifer.
here is a problem;
if u do some thing like:
while(false){
System.out.println("aaaa");
}
Compiler complains about not being able to reach the statement.
But if you do some thing like this:
void aMethod(){
// some code.
return;
// some more code.
}
here the compiler is ok, why its not complaining about some satatement being unreachable.
thanx in advance.
Jennifer Warren.