Rolf Weasel

f.j.iop.iopgf y=f.j.new iop().new iopgf()
will not compile because
(i) no new after "="
(ii) no braces after f.j
the following compiles:
f.j.iop.iopgf y=new f.j().new iop().new iopgf()
[ April 16, 2002: Message edited by: Rolf Weasel ]

hi! i've been using a full blown 20 day license demo of rational rose on my NT 550MHz 96MB ram box. it works fine if i don't specify jdk1.2 for the type of project. when i specify jdk1.2 it load tons and tons of classes, really hogs memory and becomes very sluggish. i just can't run any other apps with it. and when i used the "publish to web" feature to publish my diagrams (just a few diagrams) to a server on my ethernet lan, it went on and on publishing all sorts of junk about all those classes most of which i'll never use. a solid 15 minutes and it was still going strong but i finally cancelled. do i need more memory? or does rose just plain suck?

i just got the Inprise App Server along with JBuilder 3.5. Inprise promises comprehensive compatibility with the J2EE standard. but it is not on sun's list of certified vendors/ products, meaning the compatibility test has not been officially done on it. does anybody know if this app server has any compatibility problems? i believe sun charges big bucks for the certification. there's just 12 names on it and none of the famous app servers.

I have UML distilled. it has a chapter on process. very brief and sketchy. is there a good web resource on RUP or some other process, like the Extreme Programming site ( which is really cool btw).

Does anybody know a good web resource for the process of assembling UML diagrams, like maybe RUP. I found lots on UML itself but nothing on the process.

anybody?

hi! thanks for the replys. i got the whiteboard tj and also the rose j (20 day demo). and i had subscribed to the tj newsletter thingy and they just sent me a mail with a license valid for a month that'll make my whiteboard fullblown!
anyways i'm going with rose unless there's something groundbreaking on tj.

i heard that too (mainly from u, paul!). but is it worth spending $1500 more on? i'm deciding between rose foundation for java, and tj. what does tj have that rose java does'nt?

Does anybody know a free web hosting site that will let me put up JSP and servlets? If there's no free site, which is the cheapest?

u have'nt instantiated the interface with the new, you've instantiated an anonymous class that implements the interface.

when u have doubts like that, there's only one way to know for sure...compile and run.
the code works fine. check it out for yourself.
alkesh, marcus mock 3 may be beta, but it's still way more accurate than most other tests out there . if u encountered any mistakes, bring them up in the Mock Exam Errata page so they can be discussed in full.
[This message has been edited by Rolf Weasel (edited March 26, 2000).]

Umesh, i think the line causing your confusion is:
public void Base(){
This is not a constructor since it defines a return type of void. Hence, there are no constructors defined for the class Base. The compiler therefore supplies a default no-argument constructor, which is invoked by the default no-argument constructor of class In.

what the question asks is if this is ok:
oneInterface oi=new oneInterface();
it is'nt.
u can have:
oneInterface oi=new one();

'It' changes the implementation without changing the interface and causes no consequential changes to other code. Encapsulation does not change implementation, a programmer does! and changing the interface can't `cause consequential changes to the other code', it can only `require consequential changes to the other code'!
if there's questions worded like this on the actual exam, gawd help us!

This question is one of the sample questions at the sun site and i must say it worries me a bit. The grammer is atrocious!
D.It changes the implementation without changing the interface and causes no consequential changes to other code.
Sun says they got all sorts of language experts going thru all questions in the real exam. One would think the few sample questions would at least make sense.
[This message has been edited by Rolf Weasel (edited March 25, 2000).]