I guess technically he's right, though my impression is that the code is more of an example and not intended to actually compile.

The line:
> Application application = new Application();
probably could be changed to something like:
> Application application = new YourClassThatImplementsApplication();
which I think would clear up any confusion.

Dario, though there is a slight correction needed here, did you really create this bug because you had a question and could not find anywhere else to submit it? (Forgive me if I am mistaken.) You should really be joining the mailing list and submitting questions there. Bugs should only be created when defects are found that need to be fixed.
http://www.quickfixj.org/support/
It's a good list, and you'll learn a lot by reading questions other people have posted.

Please follow Grants suggestion and post question on the list.

If you have concrete text snippets how the user manual could be improved,
please attach it to this issue. We will review it and update the manual
accordingly.

I've submitted a fix to this page. It's minor, but I think it's sufficient.

Here's the diff:

• Application application = new Application();
  + // FooApplication is your class that implements the Application interface
  + Application application = new FooApplication();
  +

Dario, what do you think?

Hi, it's more clear now. Thanks for pointing me over to the mailing list.

This documentation improvement has been committed in rev#1047.