I faced with a sample code in Java and it brought me a question.
Java sample code is:
...
public interface CLibrary extends Library {
CLibrary INSTANCE = (CLibrary) Native.loadLibrary((Platform.isWindows() ? "msvcrt" : "c"), CLibrary.class);
void printf(String format, Object... args);
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
CLibrary.INSTANCE.printf("Hello, World\n");
}
But in C# we cannot write like that:
public interface IMyInterface {
static readonly int staticInt = 5; // compile error
static readonly SomeClass staticInstance = new SomeClass(); // compile error
}
What is the difference between these two languages/frameworks?
What design policy permit java to have const fields in an interface or what prevents .NET from having that?
The use of interfaces to hold constants is usually frowned on these days in Java too. (I’d say that storing non-compile-time-constant fields like your example is even more frowned upon.)
Fundamentally, it’s at odd with the idea of an interface: a contract that the implementation will uphold. The implementation isn’t going to provide the field, so what’s it doing there?
I suspect the C# team decided that it was sufficiently at odds with the concept behind interfaces to not include it in the language. I don’t know whether it’s just a C# restriction or a CLR restriction too. For example, I know that the CLR allows interfaces to declare nested types, but C# doesn’t currently allow this.