Can\'t find a satisfactory answer anywhere.
Simply put, a top-level type declaration cannot be static, because the Java Language Specification (JLS) doesn't say that it can be. The JLS says this explicitly about the static
keyword as a modifier of top-level classes:
The modifier
static
pertains only to member classes (§8.5.1), not to top level or local or anonymous classes.
However, the accepted answer - which has many upvotes - says that this is because top-level classes are implicitly static "by definition", so the static
modifier would be unnecessary. That is wrong.
The word "static" appears in the JLS in quite a few places, but never to refer to top-level type declarations. Here is an exhaustive list of things that can be "static":
throws
clause are statically thrown.There are no uses of the word "static" in the JLS to refer to top-level type declarations; so as well as not being explicitly static, they are not (and cannot be) "implicitly" static, by definition.
2.We should define members as static which Should be common to all objects of the class. Since, Every class is already common to all of its objects and there is no need to make it static to become available to all of its objects.
All top-level classes are, by definition, static.
What the static
boils down to is that an instance of the class can stand on its own. Or, the other way around: a non-static inner class (= instance inner class) cannot exist without an instance of the outer class. Since a top-level class does not have an outer class, it can't be anything but static
.
Because all top-level classes are static, having the static
keyword in a top-level class definition is pointless.
Some code to play around with:
public class Foo {
public class Bar {
// Non-static innner class
}
public static class Baz {
// Static inner class
}
}
public class Example {
public static void main(String[] args) {
new Foo(); // this is ok
new Foo.Baz(); // this is ok
new Foo.Bar(); // does not compile!
Foo f = new Foo();
Foo.Bar bar = f.new Bar(); //this works, but don't do this
}
}
I put the "but don't do this" in there because it's really ugly code design. Instance inner classes should not be visible outside the outer class. They should only be used from within the outer class.
Whenever we run a class JVM instantiates an object. JVM can create a number of objects, by definition Static means you have same set of copy to all objects.So, if top class is static then whenever you run a program it creates an Object and keeps over riding on to the same Memory Location.
Well I guess you dont understand properly if you desire to see a "static" keyword in an outer class.
In short how are you even going to use the feature of static on an outer class?
public class Outer
{
public static int x = 0 ;
}
Now you are going to do Outer.x to access the static variable . This would imply that x shares a single value across all objects of Outer.
Now that we have that away , of what consequence would the static keyword in the Outer class be ? .
The access modifier supported for top level are class are as follows :
1) public
2) default
3) abstract
4) final
5) strictfp.
Reason: Top level class
Because the static keyword is meant for providing memory and executing logic without creating Objects, a class does not have a value logic directly, so the static keyword is not allowed for outer class and mainly as mentioned above static can't be used at Package level. It only used within the Class level.