SIP 25 - @static fields and methods in Scala objects(SI-4581)

Dmitry Petrashko, Sébastien Doeraene and Martin Odersky

first submitted 11 January 2016


We would like to allow methods and fields to be compiled as static. This is usable for interop with Java and other JVM languages, as well as with JavaScript, and is convenient for optimizations.

Use Cases

Some JVM and JavaScript frameworks require classes to have specific static fields and/or methods.

For example, classes extending android.os.Parcelable are required to have a static field named CREATOR of type android.os.Parcelable$Creator.

Another example is using an AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater.

On the JavaScript side, one example is Relay Route Definitions, whose subclasses must define static fields such as queries. Static methods and fields for JavaScript classes are one of the very few things (if not the only thing) that Scala.js “cannot do” at the moment, at least not declaratively.


In order for a method or field to be considered static it needs to be defined in an object and annotated @static. There is no special syntax proposed to access these members, they are accessed as if they were a member of defining objects with all appropriate access requirements for accessing them.

For example:

class Foo

object Foo {
  @static val x = 5
  @static def bar(y: Int): Int = x + y


Intuitively, the presence of the @static annotation ensures that a field/method is declared as a static member of the companion class. For the JVM, the above would therefore look to other Java code as if it had been declared with the following Java code:

class Foo {
  public static int x = 5;
  public static int bar(int y) {
    return x + y;

In Scala.js, the @static annotation has no semantic effect in Scala objects, as they are not visible from JavaScript anyway (it could be used for optimizations). It has a semantic effect on Scala.js-defined JS classes, for example:

class Foo extends js.Object

object Foo extends js.Object {
  @static val x = 5
  @static def bar(y: Int): Int = x + y

would look to JavaScript code as if it had been declared with the following JavaScript code:

class Foo extends Object {
  static bar(y) {
    return x + y;
Foo.x = 5; // in ES6, there is no declarative syntax for static fields yet

Comparison with mirror classes

Scalac currently generates static forwarders for fields and methods in top-level objects:

object O {
  val d = 1 
  object I {
    val f = 1

Under the proposed scheme users will be able to opt-in to have the field f defined in the inner object I emited as a static field. In case O.d is annotated with @static the field will be created as a static field d in class O. If not annotated, it will be created in the companion module with a static forwarder d in class O.


The following rules ensure that methods can be correctly compiled into static members on both JVM and JavaScript:

  1. Only objects can have members annotated with @static

  2. The fields annotated with @static should preceed any non-@static fields. This ensures that we do not introduce surprises for users in initialization order.

  3. The right hand side of a method or field annotated with @static can only refer to top-level classes, members of globally accessible objects and @static members. In particular, for non-static objects this is not accesible. super is never accessible.

  4. If a member foo of an object C is annotated with @static, the companion class C is not allowed to define term members with name foo.

  5. If a member foo of an object C is annotated with @static, the companion class C is not allowed to inherit classes that define a term member with name foo.

  6. Only @static methods and vals are supported in companions of traits. Java8 supports those, but not vars, and JavaScript does not have interfaces at all.

Compilation scheme

No modification of the typer is planned. The current proposed scheme piggybacks on already existing scoping restrictions in the typer, thus requiring @static methods to be defined in objects.

If implemented in the dotty code base, the following modifications would be needed:

  • extend RefChecks to check restrictions 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6. This can be done in a separate mini-phase;
  • extend LambdaLift.CollectDependencies to be aware that accessing a member annotated @static should not trigger capturing the object that contains this member;
  • extend LambdaLift to trigger an error if a method annotated with @static method cannot be lifted to the top level scope;
  • extend GenBCode to emit static fields and methods in companion classes and forwarders to them in companion modules.

Overriding & Hiding

Java allows classes to define static methods with the same name and signature as a static method of a superclass. In order to define the semantics of such cases, the Java Specification introduces the notion of hiding.

This is required because in Java calling a static method on a class instance is supported. This proposal does not need to introduce this notion as we do not support such calls.

Comparison with @lrytz’s proposal

Lukas Rytz has proposed a similar SIP, but his SIP requires changes to the typer to ensure that @static fields do not capture this, as in his proposal @static fields are defined in the class, rather than its companion object. It also does not address the question of @static members in inner objects and inheritance/hiding of those methods in subclasses.

Open questions

  • @static lazy val

See Also

blog comments powered by Disqus

SIP Committee Decision

Under Revision

Authors need to update the proposal before the next review.