import java.util.*; public class NewTreeSet2 extends NewTreeSet { public static void main(String [] args) { NewTreeSet2 t = new NewTreeSet2(); t.count(); } } protected class NewTreeSet { void count() { for (int x = 0; x < 7; x++,x++ ) { System.out.print(" " + x); } } }
int x = 3; int y = 1; if (x = y) /* Line 3 */ { System.out.println("x =" + x); }
public static void main(String[] args) { Object obj = new Object() { public int hashCode() { return 42; } }; System.out.println(obj.hashCode()); }
In this case the annoynous class is extending the Object class. Within the {} you place the methods you want for that class. After this class has been declared its methods can be used by that object in the usual way e.g. objectname.annoymousClassMethod()
public class SyncTest { public static void main (String [] args) { Thread t = new Thread() { Foo f = new Foo(); public void run() { f.increase(20); } }; t.start(); } } class Foo { private int data = 23; public void increase(int amt) { int x = data; data = x + amt; } }and assuming that data must be protected from corruption, what?if anything?can you add to the preceding code to ensure the integrity of data?
Option A is incorrect because synchronizing the run() method would stop other threads from running the run() method (a bad idea) but still would not prevent other threads with other runnables from accessing the increase() method.
Option B is incorrect for virtually the same reason as A?synchronizing the code that calls the increase() method does not prevent other code from calling the increase() method.
Option A and C are wrong because public and protected are less restrictive. Option B and D are wrong because abstract and synchronized are not access modifiers.
Option A is incorrect because at runtime assertions are ignored by default.
Option B is incorrect because as of Java 1.4 you must add the argument -source 1.4 to the command line if you want the compiler to compile assertion statements.
Option D is incorrect because the VM evaluates all assertion flags left to right.
public class Switch2 { final static short x = 2; public static int y = 0; public static void main(String [] args) { for (int z=0; z < 3; z++) { switch (z) { case x: System.out.print("0 "); case x-1: System.out.print("1 "); case x-2: System.out.print("2 "); } } } }
Option B is wrong. The final modifier means that this method cannot be constructed in a subclass. A final method cannot be abstract.
Option C is wrong. static is concerned with the class and not an instance.
Option D is wrong. protected is not permitted when declaring a method of an interface. See information below.
Member declarations in an interface disallow the use of some declaration modifiers; you cannot use transient, volatile, or synchronized in a member declaration in an interface. Also, you may not use the private and protected specifiers when declaring members of an interface.
When a new LinkedHashMap is created by passing a reference to an existing Collection to the constructor of a LinkedHashMap the Collection.addAll method will ultimately be invoked.
The addAll method uses an iterator to the existing Collection to iterate through the elements of the existing Collection and add each to the instance of the new LinkedHashMap.
Since the iteration order of the LinkedHashMap is determined by the order of insertion, the iteration order of the new LinkedHashMap must be the same as the interation order of the old Collection.
Option B is wrong because null cannot be in single quotes.
Option C is wrong because there are multiple characters between the single quotes ('abc').
Option D is wrong because you can't cast a char (primitive) to a String (object).
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.