The book "Thinking in Java" still relevant?

[Quake]

In another thread, some people recommended me the book "Thinking in Java". It was published in 2006. I wonder if the book is still relevant.

Which year will be the most up-to date?

[Redache]

The fundamentals of the book will still apply, not much has changed in Java since then. Java 7 will have some new features but learning the core language will still be the same regardless of year.

[Queue29]

They key feature that might be missing is Generics, which is a very fundamental change to the language. If it's based on Java 1.5 or up, then I'd say it's still a relevant book. If it's 1.4 or previous, then junk it.

[Quake]

Thanks... But I see the book is a little bit expensive for my liking (student poor).
The university has the 2003 edition book, will that one be still relevant?

Edit: Queue29, here's the PDF of the book, do you think the 2003 version is still relevant? http://www.mindviewinc.com/downloads...edition4.0.zip

[vamega]

I've been programming in Java for over four years now, and I'd highly recommend the book. It's not a beginners book for learning java, and hence it doesn't bother with introducing you to the language. However it talks about a lot of intricacies and gives you a very deep understanding of the language.

I think the website of the book has the latest edition in an ebook format. Perhaps you could get it there?

[Quake]

Thanks Vamega. I'm not a beginner per se but my second java course is all about Objects, so I want to get a hang of it before I begin the course.

[Quake]

I'm sorry to revive this thread but I had to... I've just picked up the book and WOW, the explanation is very logical. He wants to really explain to you the internal working of Java.

Better than going to the Java course.

[KdotJ]

I might have a look into this book, or maybe look for one with generics. Lol, I used a book from 2000 (ish) to learn java lol, the book talked about Windows ME and how sun have a new GUI toolkit named Swing...

[PaulM1985]

I sort of agree with Queue, Java 1.5 was pretty significant so I would aim for something based on that or newer. This is based on 1.4 according to the preface. It still would be worth a read but try to get something from 1.5 onward.

Paul

[Quake]

I sort of agree with Queue, Java 1.5 was pretty significant so I would aim for something based on that or newer. This is based on 1.4 according to the preface. It still would be worth a read but try to get something from 1.5 onward.

Paul

The 3rd revision (2003) is based on Java 1.4?