I am just trying to understand why all fields defined in an Interface are implicitly static and final. The idea of keeping fields static makes sense to me as you can't have objects of an interface but why they are final (implicitly)?
Any one knows why Java designers went with making the fields in an interface static and final?
Reason for being final
Any implementations can change value of fields if they are not defined as final. Then they would become a part of the implementation. An interface is a pure specification without any implementation.
Reason for being static
If they are static, then they belong to the interface, and not the object, nor the run-time type of the object.
Specification, contracts... The machine instruction for field access uses object address plus field offset. Since classes can implement many interfaces, there is no way to make non-final interface field to have the same offset in all classes that extend this interface. Therefore different mechanism for field access must be implemented: two memory accesses (get field offset, get field value) instead of one plus maintaining kind of virtual field table (analog of virtual method table). Guess they just didn't want to complicate jvm for functionality that can be easily simulated via existing stuff (methods).
In scala we can have fields in interfaces, though internally they are implemented as I explained above (as methods).
