我完全同意，限制太严格了。使用静态辅助方法(如Tom Hawtin - tackline所建议的)或将所有“pre-super()计算”推入参数中的单个表达式并不总是可行的，例如:

class Sup {
    public Sup(final int x_) { 
        //cheap constructor 
    }
    public Sup(final Sup sup_) { 
        //expensive copy constructor 
    }
}

class Sub extends Sup {
    private int x;
    public Sub(final Sub aSub) {
        /* for aSub with aSub.x == 0, 
         * the expensive copy constructor is unnecessary:
         */

         /* if (aSub.x == 0) { 
          *    super(0);
          * } else {
          *    super(aSub);
          * } 
          * above gives error since if-construct before super() is not allowed.
          */

        /* super((aSub.x == 0) ? 0 : aSub); 
         * above gives error since the ?-operator's type is Object
         */

        super(aSub); // much slower :(  

        // further initialization of aSub
    }
}

正如Carson Myers所建议的那样，使用“尚未构造的对象”异常会有所帮助，但是在每个对象构造期间检查这个异常会减慢执行速度。我希望Java编译器能够更好地区分(而不是不合理地禁止if语句，但允许在形参中使用?-操作符)，即使这会使语言规范复杂化。

构造函数按照的顺序完成执行是有意义的 推导。因为父类不知道任何子类，任何 它需要执行的初始化与可能的初始化是分开的 子类执行任何初始化的先决条件。 因此，它必须首先完成它的执行。

一个简单的演示:

class A {
    A() {
        System.out.println("Inside A's constructor.");
    }
}

class B extends A {
    B() {
        System.out.println("Inside B's constructor.");
    }
}

class C extends B {
    C() {
        System.out.println("Inside C's constructor.");
    }
}

class CallingCons {
    public static void main(String args[]) {
        C c = new C();
    }
}

这个程序的输出是:

Inside A's constructor
Inside B's constructor
Inside C's constructor

因为这就是传承哲学。根据Java语言规范，构造函数体是这样定义的:

ConstructorBody: {ExplicitConstructorInvocationopt BlockStatementsopt}

构造函数体的第一个语句可以是任意一个

显式调用同一类的另一个构造函数(通过使用关键字“this”);或 直接超类的显式调用(通过使用关键字"super")

If a constructor body does not begin with an explicit constructor invocation and the constructor being declared is not part of the primordial class Object, then the constructor body implicitly begins with a superclass constructor invocation "super();", an invocation of the constructor of its direct superclass that takes no arguments. And so on.. there will be a whole chain of constructors called all the way back to the constructor of Object; "All Classes in the Java platform are Descendants of Object". This thing is called "Constructor Chaining".

为什么会这样? Java以这种方式定义ConstructorBody的原因是，他们需要维护对象的层次结构。记住继承的定义;它扩展了一个类。话虽如此，你不能扩展不存在的东西。首先需要创建基类(超类)，然后才能派生它(子类)。这就是为什么他们称它们为父类和子类;你不能没有父母就有孩子。

On a technical level, a subclass inherits all the members (fields, methods, nested classes) from its parent. And since Constructors are NOT members (They don't belong to objects. They are responsible of creating objects) so they are NOT inherited by subclasses, but they can be invoked. And since at the time of object creation only ONE constructor is executed. So how do we guarantee the creation of the superclass when you create the subclass object? Thus the concept of "constructor chaining"; so we have the ability to invoke other constructors (i.e. super) from within the current constructor. And Java required this invocation to be the FIRST line in the subclass constructor to maintain the hierarchy and guarantee it. They assume that if you don't explicitly create the parent object FIRST (like if you forgot about it), they will do it implicitly for you.

该检查在编译期间进行。但是我不确定在运行时会发生什么，我们会得到什么样的运行时错误，如果Java没有抛出一个编译错误，当我们显式地试图从子类的构造函数中执行一个基本构造函数时，在它的主体中间，而不是从第一行开始……

我完全同意，限制太严格了。使用静态辅助方法(如Tom Hawtin - tackline所建议的)或将所有“pre-super()计算”推入参数中的单个表达式并不总是可行的，例如:

class Sup {
    public Sup(final int x_) { 
        //cheap constructor 
    }
    public Sup(final Sup sup_) { 
        //expensive copy constructor 
    }
}

class Sub extends Sup {
    private int x;
    public Sub(final Sub aSub) {
        /* for aSub with aSub.x == 0, 
         * the expensive copy constructor is unnecessary:
         */

         /* if (aSub.x == 0) { 
          *    super(0);
          * } else {
          *    super(aSub);
          * } 
          * above gives error since if-construct before super() is not allowed.
          */

        /* super((aSub.x == 0) ? 0 : aSub); 
         * above gives error since the ?-operator's type is Object
         */

        super(aSub); // much slower :(  

        // further initialization of aSub
    }
}

正如Carson Myers所建议的那样，使用“尚未构造的对象”异常会有所帮助，但是在每个对象构造期间检查这个异常会减慢执行速度。我希望Java编译器能够更好地区分(而不是不合理地禁止if语句，但允许在形参中使用?-操作符)，即使这会使语言规范复杂化。

Tldr:

其他的答案都解决了这个问题的“为什么”。我将提供一个关于这个限制的hack:

基本思想是用嵌入式语句劫持超级语句。这可以通过将语句伪装成表达式来实现。

Tsdr:

假设我们想在调用super()之前执行Statement1()到Statement9():

public class Child extends Parent {
    public Child(T1 _1, T2 _2, T3 _3) {
        Statement_1();
        Statement_2();
        Statement_3(); // and etc...
        Statement_9();
        super(_1, _2, _3); // compiler rejects because this is not the first line
    }
}

编译器当然会拒绝我们的代码。所以，我们可以这样做:

// This compiles fine:

public class Child extends Parent {
    public Child(T1 _1, T2 _2, T3 _3) {
        super(F(_1), _2, _3);
    }

    public static T1 F(T1 _1) {
        Statement_1();
        Statement_2();
        Statement_3(); // and etc...
        Statement_9();
        return _1;
    }
}

唯一的限制是父类必须有一个构造函数，该构造函数必须至少接受一个参数，以便我们可以将语句作为表达式潜入。

这里有一个更详细的例子:

public class Child extends Parent {
    public Child(int i, String s, T1 t1) {
        i = i * 10 - 123;
        if (s.length() > i) {
            s = "This is substr s: " + s.substring(0, 5);
        } else {
            s = "Asdfg";
        }
        t1.Set(i);
        T2 t2 = t1.Get();
        t2.F();
        Object obj = Static_Class.A_Static_Method(i, s, t1);
        super(obj, i, "some argument", s, t1, t2); // compiler rejects because this is not the first line
    }
}

改写成:

// This compiles fine:

public class Child extends Parent {
    public Child(int i, String s, T1 t1) {
        super(Arg1(i, s, t1), Arg2(i), "some argument", Arg4(i, s), t1, Arg6(i, t1));
    }

    private static Object Arg1(int i, String s, T1 t1) {
        i = Arg2(i);
        s = Arg4(s);
        return Static_Class.A_Static_Method(i, s, t1);
    }

    private static int Arg2(int i) {
        i = i * 10 - 123;
        return i;
    }

    private static String Arg4(int i, String s) {
        i = Arg2(i);
        if (s.length() > i) {
            s = "This is sub s: " + s.substring(0, 5);
        } else {
            s = "Asdfg";
        }
        return s;
    }

    private static T2 Arg6(int i, T1 t1) {
        i = Arg2(i);
        t1.Set(i);
        T2 t2 = t1.Get();
        t2.F();
        return t2;
    }
}

事实上，编译器可以为我们自动化这个过程。他们只是选择不这么做。

在子类构造函数中添加super()的主要目标是编译器的主要工作是将所有类与Object类建立直接或间接的连接，这就是为什么编译器检查我们是否提供了super(参数化)，然后编译器不承担任何责任。 这样所有的实例成员从Object初始化为子类。