Errata for Java in a Nutshell
Submit your own errata for this product.
The errata list is a list of errors and their corrections that were found after the product was released.
The following errata were submitted by our customers and have not yet been approved or disproved by the author or editor. They solely represent the opinion of the customer.
Color Key: Serious Technical Mistake Minor Technical Mistake Language or formatting error Typo Question Note Update
|Safari Books Online
From Java In a Nutshell, 5th Edition, section 4.1.3:
"Second, consider List methods such as add() that are declared to
accept an argument whose type is specified by the type parameter. This
is the more surprising case: when the type parameter is unknown, the
compiler does not let you invoke any methods that have a parameter of
the unknown type because it cannot check that you are passing an
appropriate value. A List<?> is effectively read-only since the
compiler does not allow us to invoke methods like add( ), set(), and
This is incorrect and misleading.
First, the compiler *does* allow you to invoke the add() method in
this example -- it simply requires that a suitable value (a subtype of
the capture variable) be provided. The null reference is such a
value, and so it is always possible to write "l.add(null)" when l has
Second, there are other ways to mutate a List<?> in addition to
directly invoking add(), set(), or addAll(). The clear() method, for
example, mutates a collection without making reference to the class's
type parameter. And methods like Collections.sort() allow a name to
be inferred for the unknown type, which then permits values of
inferred type T to be returned by get(), etc., and then passed to
It's dangerous to suggest that a read-only interface to a collection
can be had by simply weakening its type argument. Instead,
programmers should be encouraged to use
Collections.unmodifiableList(), etc., and, for better compile-time
enforcement, consider weakening the type to Iterable<T> (this
interface still doesn't guarantee read-only access statically, though,
because the Iterator<T> interface has a remove() method).
||Apr 07, 2009
First code example (2nd paragraph)
In the pattern string, the '^' appears to be (a) unnecessary (b) confusing. If removed, the pattern still successfully matches.
||Jun 02, 2010
8th line from bottom
// Set limit to 0; >> // Set position to 0;
||Sep 21, 2010