static are instance variables

[gabri]

I would like to discuss with someone this points:

static attributes and methods of a class are converted at runtime to instance attributes and methods of that class.

primitive types and reference types are objects.

Excuse me if any of these was treated before.

[masijade]

So what exactly do you want to discuss, as neither of those are correct.

[gabri]

ok only for the first point, where do those static attributes and methods are stored?

do you agree they must be part of an object?

[gabri]

Its hard for me to explain.
When i declare static methods and attributes, there must be an object that contains them to use them, isn't it?
After reading a bit JLS, i found that in Class initialization, static members are "incarnated" in the Class object.

[masijade]

Class is also an "object", although one that you do not, normally, directly instantiate. The Class object that represents that Type is where the static methods and variables exist.

They are associated with the Class, not with any one instantiaed instance of that Class.

[gabri]

How's that association?
Aren't they "injected" to the class instance??
I said class instance, not instance of the class :)

[jverd]

This was answered thoroughly in Sun's Java forums. I assume you are the same OP.

Reposting in another forum won't change the fact that primitives are not objects, nor will it change any of the other correct and thorough explanations you were given. If there's something you didn't understand about them, post your questions clearly and concisely in your original thread and they will be addressed.

[jverd]

static attributes and methods of a class are converted at runtime to instance attributes and methods of that class.

No, they're not. I don't know where you got that idea. I can only assume you're inventing it on the fly as a way to try to force-fit Java into your perception of it.

primitive types and reference types are objects.

No, they're not.

[georgemc]

Hi masijade, long time no see! It may interest you to know that the OP recently raised this issue on Suns own Java forums, and got rather abusive when he failed to get the response he wanted

forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5335355

What's missing is the now-deleted other thread where he announced his intent to get banned, and proceeed to slander several members of the forum with an amount of profanity

[jverd]

Its hard for me to explain.
When i declare static methods and attributes, there must be an object that contains them to use them, isn't it?

Nope. Not sure why you'd think that.

Perhaps you think that all "data" must be stored in objects. That's not the case. An object only needs to hold object-specific data. Class variables (static member variables) are held in the Method Area of memory, as described in java.sun.com/docs/books/jvms/second_edition/html/Overview.doc.html#6656. This is where per-class information is stored, including the code for *all* methods--both static and non-static, and class variables. (Instance method code--non-static methods--can be stored there because executable code is read only.) The only thing that goes into objects on the heap is per-object data--instance member variables--and, depending on the implementation and what you view as composing an "object" at the level of VM memory allocation, some sort of pointer/reference/handle to the class definition for that object.

[georgemc]

Its hard for me to explain.
When i declare static methods and attributes, there must be an object that contains them to use them, isn't it?
After reading a bit JLS, i found that in Class initialization, static members are "incarnated" in the Class object.

Correction: it was pointed out to you at great length by someone else, and you cherry-picked the bits of it you thought would support your bizarre idea that static members are instance members, somehow

[masijade]

Hi masijade, long time no see! It may interest you to know that the OP recently raised this issue on Suns own Java forums, and got rather abusive when he failed to get the response he wanted

forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5335355

What's missing is the now-deleted other thread where he announced his intent to get banned, and proceeed to slander several members of the forum with an amount of profanity

Hey george. I didn't notice that one, but, somehow, it doesn't surprise me. The "thoughts" mentioned in the OP seemed (however far deranged) a little too contrived to be simple musing. ;-)

[georgemc]

I'm guessing our hero here must've realised that since other people than the ego-junkie scumbags at Sun.com thought he was talking rubbish, then maybe he was.