see also JavaSingleton
-----
 '''public class''' Registry {
     '''private static''' List register = '''new''' ArrayList();
     '''public static void''' register(Object obj){
          register.add(obj);
     }
     '''public static boolean''' isRegistered(Object obj){
          '''return''' register.contains(obj);
     }
 }

The above ''Registry'' class makes use of a '''private static List''' to hold objects. There are many cases where this is fine. However, What would happen if ''Registry'' were loaded by two different ClassLoader''''''s.  I think there would be two instances of the class, and therefore two instances of the ''register'' list. -- EricHerman

''More generally, since '''static''' methods are not polymorphic, you may find using them to encourage a less '''objecty''' (and perhaps more smelly) style.''

----
There's also the trap that I fall into, that static members are not inherited. So if you have a F''''''ooRegistry which extends Registry, it needs its own static ArrayList '''and''' you have to re-write the register etc. methods '''not''' in terms of super().

Though personally I don't find these kinds of "static classes" objectionable, especially where they're used for Factory or registries or in-general keeping track of instances of a set of related classes. I'm also happy that there exists the Collections class (I like this 'pluralization' naming convention, too) in the Java library for its methods like #sort(), but there are others there - especially things like #unmodifiableSet() that would benefit from MoveMethod refactoring.

In ZoIsite I use "static classes" to implement a kind of Facade - that's how I think of it anyway. Whenever I write one of these, I always include something like

 private C''''''lassName() {} // static class

-- KarlKnechtel
----
''Interesting. Where would you move 'Collections.unmodifiableSet(<Set>)' to?''

'new UnmodifiableSet(<Set>)'  That's what happens behind the scenes in Collections.unmodifiable<Blah>() anyway.

''Something like that. and Collections.singleton(Object) - I think that was the name; the one that makes an immutable set containing just the specified Object - definitely needs that kind of treatment. Say, new UnmodifiableSet(Object[]) with a one-element array.''
----
Static methods in Java aren't really class methods. They're really global methods, since they're bound at compile-time and can't be overridden. In the past I've found myself writing bizarre hacks to get around this limitation in language design, though these days I just use another language if I have a choice. -- francis

CategoryComputerLanguage