我同意大多数人所说的，在处理常量集合时最好使用枚举。然而，如果你在Android上编程，有一个更好的解决方案:IntDef Annotation。

@Retention(SOURCE)
@IntDef({NAVIGATION_MODE_STANDARD, NAVIGATION_MODE_LIST,NAVIGATION_MODE_TABS})
public @interface NavigationMode {}
public static final int NAVIGATION_MODE_STANDARD = 0;
public static final int NAVIGATION_MODE_LIST = 1;
public static final int NAVIGATION_MODE_TABS = 2;
...
public abstract void setNavigationMode(@NavigationMode int mode);
@NavigationMode
public abstract int getNavigationMode();

IntDef注释在一个简单的方面优于枚举，它占用的空间明显更少，因为它只是一个编译时标记。它不是一个类，也没有自动字符串转换属性。

这完全可以接受，甚至可能是标准。

(public/private) static final TYPE NAME = VALUE;

其中TYPE是类型，NAME是全大写的名称，空格用下划线表示，VALUE是常量值;

我强烈建议不要将常量放在它们自己的类或接口中。

附注:声明为final且为mutable的变量仍然可以更改;但是，变量永远不能指向不同的对象。

例如:

public static final Point ORIGIN = new Point(0,0);

public static void main(String[] args){

    ORIGIN.x = 3;

}

这是合法的，ORIGIN将是(3,0)点。

只是要避免使用接口:

public interface MyConstants {
    String CONSTANT_ONE = "foo";
}

public class NeddsConstant implements MyConstants {

}

这很诱人，但违反了封装，并且模糊了类定义的区别。

根据上面的评论，我认为这是一个很好的方法，将老式的全局常量类(具有公共静态final变量)更改为类似枚举的等价物，如下所示:

public class Constants {

    private Constants() {
        throw new AssertionError();
    }

    public interface ConstantType {}

    public enum StringConstant implements ConstantType {
        DB_HOST("localhost");
        // other String constants come here

        private String value;
        private StringConstant(String value) {
            this.value = value;
        }
        public String value() {
            return value;
        }
    }

    public enum IntConstant implements ConstantType {
        DB_PORT(3128), 
        MAX_PAGE_SIZE(100);
        // other int constants come here

        private int value;
        private IntConstant(int value) {
            this.value = value;
        }
        public int value() {
            return value;
        }
    }

    public enum SimpleConstant implements ConstantType {
        STATE_INIT,
        STATE_START,
        STATE_END;
    }

}

这样我就可以把它们引用为:

Constants.StringConstant.DB_HOST

我更喜欢使用getter而不是常量。这些getter可能返回常量值，例如public int getMaxConnections() {return 10;}，但任何需要常量的东西都将通过getter。

一个好处是，如果您的程序超出了常量的使用范围——您发现它需要可配置——您可以更改getter返回常量的方式。

另一个好处是，为了修改常量，你不必重新编译所有使用它的东西。当引用静态final字段时，该常量的值将被编译到引用它的任何字节码中。

有一定的观点来回答这个问题。首先，java中的常量通常被声明为public、static和final。原因如下:

public, so that they are accessible from everywhere
static, so that they can be accessed without any instance. Since they are constants it
  makes little sense to duplicate them for every object.
final, since they should not be allowed to change

我永远不会为CONSTANTS访问器/对象使用接口，因为接口通常是需要实现的。这看起来是不是很有趣:

String myConstant = IMyInterface.CONSTANTX;

相反，我会在一些不同的方法中进行选择，基于一些小的权衡，所以这取决于你需要什么:

1.  Use a regular enum with a default/private constructor. Most people would define 
     constants this way, IMHO.
  - drawback: cannot effectively Javadoc each constant member
  - advantage: var members are implicitly public, static, and final
  - advantage: type-safe
  - provides "a limited constructor" in a special way that only takes args which match
     predefined 'public static final' keys, thus limiting what you can pass to the
     constructor

2.  Use a altered enum WITHOUT a constructor, having all variables defined with 
     prefixed 'public static final' .
  - looks funny just having a floating semi-colon in the code
  - advantage: you can JavaDoc each variable with an explanation
  - drawback: you still have to put explicit 'public static final' before each variable
  - drawback: not type-safe
  - no 'limited constructor'

3.  Use a Class with a private constructor:
  - advantage: you can JavaDoc each variable with an explanation
  - drawback: you have to put explicit 'public static final' before each variable
  - you have the option of having a constructor to create an instance
     of the class if you want to provide additional functions related
     to your constants 
     (or just keep the constructor private)
  - drawback: not type-safe

4. Using interface:
  - advantage: you can JavaDoc each variable with an explanation
  - advantage: var members are implicitly 'public static final'
  - you are able to define default interface methods if you want to provide additional
     functions related to your constants (only if you implement the interface)
  - drawback: not type-safe