There is one more subtle reason to initialize outside the constructor that no one has mentioned before (very specific I must say). If you are using UML tools to generate class diagrams from the code (reverse engineering), most of the tools I believe will note the initialization of Example 1 and will transfer it to a diagram (if you prefer it to show the initial values, like I do). They will not take these initial values from Example 2. Again, this is a very specific reason - if you are working with UML tools, but once I learned that, I am trying to take all my default values outside of constructor unless, as was mentioned before, there is an issue of possible exception throwing or complicated logic.

另一种选择是使用依赖注入。

class A{
   B b;

   A(B b) {
      this.b = b;
   }
}

This removes the responsibility of creating the B object from the constructor of A. This will make your code more testable and easier to maintain in the long run. The idea is to reduce the coupling between the two classes A and B. A benefit that this gives you is that you can now pass any object that extends B (or implements B if it is an interface) to A's constructor and it will work. One disadvantage is that you give up encapsulation of the B object, so it is exposed to the caller of the A constructor. You'll have to consider if the benefits are worth this trade-off, but in many cases they are.

我在回复中没有看到以下内容:

在声明时进行初始化的一个可能的优势可能是，在当今的IDE中，您可以非常容易地跳转到变量的声明(大多数情况下) Ctrl-<hover_over_the_variable>-<left_mouse_click>)在你的代码中的任何地方。然后立即看到该变量的值。否则，你必须“搜索”初始化完成的位置(主要是:构造函数)。

这个优势当然是次要的，所有其他逻辑推理，但对一些人来说，“特征”可能更重要。

其实很不一样:

声明发生在构建之前。因此，如果在两个位置都初始化了变量(本例中为b)，构造函数的初始化将取代在类级别所做的初始化。

所以在类级别声明变量，在构造函数中初始化它们。

我今天以一种有趣的方式被烧伤了:

class MyClass extends FooClass {
    String a = null;

    public MyClass() {
        super();     // Superclass calls init();
    }

    @Override
    protected void init() {
        super.init();
        if (something)
            a = getStringYadaYada();
    }
}

看到错误了吗?结果是，在父类构造函数被调用之后才调用a = null初始化式。由于超类构造函数调用init()， a的初始化之后是a = null初始化。

第二种选择更可取，因为它允许在ctors中使用不同的逻辑进行类实例化，并使用ctors链接。如。

class A {
    int b;

    // secondary ctor
    A(String b) {
         this(Integer.valueOf(b));
    }

    // primary ctor
    A(int b) {
         this.b = b;
    }
}

所以第二种选择更加灵活。