这是因为你的构造函数依赖于其他构造函数。要使你的构造函数正常工作，其他构造函数正常工作是必要的，这是依赖的。这就是为什么有必要首先检查由this()或super()在构造函数中调用的依赖构造函数。如果由this()或super()调用的其他构造函数有问题，那么什么点执行其他语句，因为如果被调用的构造函数失败，所有的构造函数都会失败。

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。

父类的构造函数需要在子类的构造函数之前调用。这将确保如果在构造函数中调用父类上的任何方法，父类已经正确设置。

你要做的是，将参数传递给超级构造函数是完全合法的，你只需要像你所做的那样内联构造这些参数，或者将它们传递给你的构造函数，然后将它们传递给super:

public MySubClassB extends MyClass {
        public MySubClassB(Object[] myArray) {
                super(myArray);
        }
}

如果编译器没有强制执行，你可以这样做:

public MySubClassB extends MyClass {
        public MySubClassB(Object[] myArray) {
                someMethodOnSuper(); //ERROR super not yet constructed
                super(myArray);
        }
}

在父类有默认构造函数的情况下，编译器会自动插入对super的调用。由于Java中的每个类都继承自Object，所以必须以某种方式调用Object的构造函数，并且必须首先执行它。编译器可以自动插入super()。强制super首先出现，强制构造函数主体以正确的顺序执行，即:Object -> Parent -> Child -> ChildOfChild -> SoOnSoForth

你能给出一个代码例子，如果编译器没有这个限制，就会发生不好的事情吗?

class Good {
    int essential1;
    int essential2;

    Good(int n) {
        if (n > 100)
            throw new IllegalArgumentException("n is too large!");
        essential1 = 1 / n;
        essential2 = n + 2;
    }
}

class Bad extends Good {
    Bad(int n) {
        try {
            super(n);
        } catch (Exception e) {
            // Exception is ignored
        }
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Bad b = new Bad(0);
//        b = new Bad(101);
        System.out.println(b.essential1 + b.essential2);
    }
}

An exception during construction almost always indicates that the object being constructed could not be properly initialized, now is in a bad state, unusable, and must be garbage collected. However, a constructor of a subclass has got the ability to ignore an exception occurred in one of its superclasses and to return a partially initialized object. In the above example, if the argument given to new Bad() is either 0 or greater than 100, then neither essential1 nor essential2 are properly initialized.

你可能会说忽略异常总是一个坏主意。好的，这里还有一个例子:

class Bad extends Good {
    Bad(int n) {
        for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
            super(i);
    }
}

很有趣，不是吗?在这个例子中我们创建了多少个对象?一个?两个?或者什么都没有……

允许在构造函数中间调用super()或this()将打开一个令人讨厌的构造函数的潘多拉盒子。

另一方面，我理解在调用super()或this()之前经常需要包含一些静态部分。这可能是任何不依赖于此引用的代码(实际上，它已经存在于构造函数的最开始，但在super()或This()返回之前不能有序使用)，并且需要进行这样的调用。此外，像在任何方法中一样，在调用super()或this()之前创建的一些局部变量可能会在调用super()或this()之后被需要。

在这种情况下，你有以下机会:

Use the pattern presented at this answer, which allows to circumvent the restriction. Wait for the Java team to allow pre-super() and pre-this() code. It may be done by imposing a restriction on where super() or this() may occur in a constructor. Actually, even today's compiler is able to distinguish good and bad (or potentially bad) cases with the degree enough to securely allow static code addition at the beginning of a constructor. Indeed, assume that super() and this() return this reference and, in turn, your constructor has

return this;

最后。以及编译器拒绝代码

public int get() {
    int x;
    for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
        x = i;
    return x;
}

public int get(int y) {
    int x;
    if (y > 0)
        x = y;
    return x;
}

public int get(boolean b) {
    int x;
    try {
        x = 1;
    } catch (Exception e) {
    }
    return x;
}

with the error "variable x might not have been initialized", it could do so on this variable, making its checks on it just like on any other local variable. The only difference is this cannot be assigned by any means other than super() or this() call (and, as usual, if there is no such call at a constructor, super() is implicitly inserted by compiler in the beginning) and might not be assigned twice. In case of any doubt (like in the first get(), where x is actually always assigned), the compiler could return an error. That would be better than simply return error on any constructor where there is something except a comment before super() or this().

我相当肯定(那些熟悉Java规范的人会说)，它是为了防止你(a)被允许使用部分构造的对象，(b)强迫父类的构造函数在一个“新”对象上构造。

“坏”事情的一些例子是:

class Thing
{
    final int x;
    Thing(int x) { this.x = x; }
}

class Bad1 extends Thing
{
    final int z;
    Bad1(int x, int y)
    {
        this.z = this.x + this.y; // WHOOPS! x hasn't been set yet
        super(x);
    }        
}

class Bad2 extends Thing
{
    final int y;
    Bad2(int x, int y)
    {
        this.x = 33;
        this.y = y; 
        super(x); // WHOOPS! x is supposed to be final
    }        
}