Which book to choose?

Alex.From.Ohio.Java@gmail.com writes:
>Thinking In Java is good one.

Recently someone claimed that "Thinking in Java 3",
contained this sentence:

|If you're defining an anonymous inner class and want to use an
|object that's defined outside the anonymous inner class, the
|compiler requires that the argument reference be final, like
|the argument to dest().

Here, Eckel writes:

»object that's defined«.

Objects, however, are not "defined", they are /created/ at
run-time. Names of reference variables are being /declared/
in the source text, not "defined".

http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/...ments.html#5920

Then, he continues to write

»argument reference be final«.

This might intend to say that a reference parameter was
declared with "final". "final" is not an attribute of a,
/reference/, but of a variable.

However, this is not about /arguments/ (the reference
arguments do not have to be declared "final" here), but
about /parameters/. The distinction between these two
Java terms seems to be unknown to Eckel.

parameter:

http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/...ames.html#6.8.7

arguments:

http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/...ions.html#15.12

He also writes:

»the compiler requires«.

It might be the case that the compiler of Mr. Eckel indeed
requires this, but he should teach a language instead of an
implementation, so it might be preferable to write
"the language specification requires«.

Also, anonymous inner classes are not being /defined/ in
Java, as Eckel writes at the beginning of the quotation, but
they are being /declared/.

Moreover, "anonymous" is an unnecessary restriction, because
the assertion is valid for /all/ inner classes. Someone
learning by this sentence thus needs to learn anew at another
time that this is also valid for non-anonymous inner classes,
or he might believe erroneously for an indetermined amount of
time, that it is only valid for anonymous inner classes.

Is there a way to improve the sentence? One attempt by me:

A parameter to be used within an inner class of its method
needs to be declared »final«.

Even the Java Language Specification itself is easier to
read than Eckel (and of course, much more correct):

Any local variable, formal method parameter or exception
handler parameter used but not declared in an inner class
must be declared final.

http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/...sses.html#8.1.3

All the reported faults have been found by me within a single
sentence chosen at random (I did not read the book, but
discovered the sentence in another posting, claiming to quote
this sentence from "Thinking in Java".) If one extrapolates this
error quotient to the whole TIJ, it gives a horrid impression.

Some books might sell chiefly because the buyer wants to
express agreement with their title. When one is learning a
foreign language one does not want to think everything in
English first and then painfully translate it word-by-word.
So one might choose "Thinking in Java" instead of a
garden-variety "Introduction to Java", because one longs for
the promise given by its title, not suspecting that the author
Eckel himself might be far from "thinking in Java".

Stefan Ram wrote:

>   All the reported faults have been found by me within a single
>   sentence chosen at random (I did not read the book, but

I think we should all be wary of drawing conclusions from a single data
point.  However, Stefan's experience mirrors my own.  I've tried a
couple of Bruce Eckel's books, including a read-through of Thinking in
Java some years ago, and I found them pretty poor overall, including the
Java book.  There are better resources available.

Besides what's been mentioned here already (Sun's tutorial and the
Javapassion website), I like _Learning Java_ published by O'Reilly.
It's a bit thick for someone brand new, and it teaches Java, not
programming, but it's generally factually correct, it's examples make
sense, and it does hit all the important parts of the API, usually with
an example that helps the API make sense.  In particular it has a very
good explanation of the nitty-gritty of generics.

Also, the Javadoc is an excellent resource, although very hard on the
beginner.  Search for Java classes with Google and a string like "java
classname se 6" to get the latest version.  I think I should start
adding the JLS to my list of references, just for completeness.  It's
actually fairly easy to read, most of the time.

Mark Space wrote:
> Also, the Javadoc is an excellent resource, although very hard on the
> beginner.  Search for Java classes with Google and a string like "java
> classname se 6" to get the latest version.  I think I should start
> adding the JLS to my list of references, just for completeness.  It's
> actually fairly easy to read, most of the time.

In order to be a decent Java programmer, much less a master, one will have t
o
become facile with the API Javadocs and the JLS.  One might as well begin th
e
adjustment process immediately.

<http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/>
<http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/...html/j3TOC.html>

Javadoc is a tool, too.  Use it to document one's own code.
<http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/t...is/javadoc.html>
also s=solaris=windows=.

--
Lew

Lew wrote:

> Javadoc is a tool, too.  Use it to document one's own code.

Yes, that's true.  I'm at a lost for a pithy name for Sun's Java
documentation.  While Javadoc is a tool, a lot of folks do seem to refer
to the main documentation as "the Javadoc."  Maybe that's not a great
idea, but it seldom seems to cause confusion.

Hmmm, maybe "Java doc" (with a space) would be a better phrase for Sun's
online documentation....

Mark Space wrote:
> I'm at a lost for a pithy name for Sun's Java
> documentation.  While Javadoc is a tool, a lot of folks do seem to refer
> to the main documentation as "the Javadoc."  Maybe that's not a great
> idea, but it seldom seems to cause confusion.
>
> Hmmm, maybe "Java doc" (with a space) would be a better phrase for Sun's
> online documentation....

The people have already spoken, and it's "the Javadocs".  I don't hold out
much hope for you to successfully buck the social momentum.

--
Lew

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 11:25:20 -0700, Mark Space wrote:


> Besides what's been mentioned here already (Sun's tutorial and the
> Javapassion website), I like _Learning Java_ published by O'Reilly.


I really like:

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/hfjava2/


It seems silly, but their silly technique of, well, silliness, works.  I
only wish they would write a book a w!  I read the first edition, but
I'm sure that the second edition is better.  Does it cover generics, I
wonder?



-Thufir

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:58:09 -0700, Santosh Krishnan wrote:


> Yes we have been prescribed a textbook called SL-275 but it has only one
> complete example. Everything else is just code snippets. Unfortunately
> the teacher isn't very good too. But thanks for your suggestion, Sun's
> tutorial seems the best option at the moment.


I'll be taking

http://www.bcit.ca/study/outlines/comp2611200830

in just a few days!

and the textbook is:

Introduction to Java Programming: Fundamentals First (Paperback)
by Y Daniel Liang (Author)

# Paperback: 704 pages
# Publisher: Prentice Hall; 6 edition (Jul 11 2006)
# Language: English
# ISBN-10: 0132237385
# ISBN-13: 978-0132237383

http://www.amazon.ca/Introduction-J...amentals-First/
dp/0132237385/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206746314&sr=1-1


I sure hope that my experience is different!  Still waiting for the darn
book in the mail.  (Bookstores are such a scam at college, thankfully
there's Amazon -- assuming the darn thing ever arrives.)


-Thufir

Core Java By Cay Horstmann and Gary Cornell

http://groups.google.com/group/java...eloupment?hl=en