就我个人而言，除了在一种罕见的情况下，我几乎从不使用finalize():我创建了一个自定义泛型类型集合，并编写了一个自定义finalize()方法，它执行以下操作:

public void finalize() throws Throwable {
    super.finalize();
    if (destructiveFinalize) {
        T item;
        for (int i = 0, l = length(); i < l; i++) {
            item = get(i);
            if (item == null) {
                continue;
            }
            if (item instanceof Window) {
                ((Window) get(i)).dispose();
            }
            if (item instanceof CompleteObject) {
                ((CompleteObject) get(i)).finalize();
            }
            set(i, null);
        }
    }
}

(CompleteObject是我做的一个接口，让你指定你已经实现了很少实现的对象方法，如#finalize()， #hashCode()和#clone()))

因此，使用姐妹方法# setdestructivelyfinalizer(布尔值)，使用我的集合的程序可以(帮助)确保销毁对该集合的引用也会销毁对其内容的引用，并处理可能在无意中保持JVM活动的任何窗口。我也考虑过停止任何线程，但这打开了一个全新的蠕虫罐头。

接受的答案列出了在finalize期间关闭资源的操作。

然而，这个答案表明，至少在使用JIT编译器的java8中，您会遇到意想不到的问题，有时甚至在您完成从对象维护的流中读取之前就调用了终结器。

所以即使在这种情况下，也不建议调用finalize。

我在生产代码中使用finalize的唯一一次是执行一个检查，检查给定对象的资源是否已被清理，如果没有，则记录一个非常明显的消息。它实际上并没有尝试自己去做，如果做得不好，它就会大喊大叫。结果很有用。

一个简单的规则:永远不要使用终结器。

对象具有终结器(不管它执行什么代码)这一事实本身就足以导致相当大的垃圾收集开销。

摘自Brian Goetz的一篇文章:

Objects with finalizers (those that have a non-trivial finalize() method) have significant overhead compared to objects without finalizers, and should be used sparingly. Finalizeable objects are both slower to allocate and slower to collect. At allocation time, the JVM must register any finalizeable objects with the garbage collector, and (at least in the HotSpot JVM implementation) finalizeable objects must follow a slower allocation path than most other objects. Similarly, finalizeable objects are slower to collect, too. It takes at least two garbage collection cycles (in the best case) before a finalizeable object can be reclaimed, and the garbage collector has to do extra work to invoke the finalizer. The result is more time spent allocating and collecting objects and more pressure on the garbage collector, because the memory used by unreachable finalizeable objects is retained longer. Combine that with the fact that finalizers are not guaranteed to run in any predictable timeframe, or even at all, and you can see that there are relatively few situations for which finalization is the right tool to use.

Be careful about what you do in a finalize(). Especially if you are using it for things like calling close() to ensure that resources are cleaned up. We ran into several situations where we had JNI libraries linked in to the running java code, and in any circumstances where we used finalize() to invoke JNI methods, we would get very bad java heap corruption. The corruption was not caused by the underlying JNI code itself, all of the memory traces were fine in the native libraries. It was just the fact that we were calling JNI methods from the finalize() at all.

这是JDK 1.5，它仍然在广泛使用。

直到很久以后，我们才发现出了问题，但最终罪魁祸首始终是使用JNI调用的finalize()方法。

就我个人而言，除了在一种罕见的情况下，我几乎从不使用finalize():我创建了一个自定义泛型类型集合，并编写了一个自定义finalize()方法，它执行以下操作:

public void finalize() throws Throwable {
    super.finalize();
    if (destructiveFinalize) {
        T item;
        for (int i = 0, l = length(); i < l; i++) {
            item = get(i);
            if (item == null) {
                continue;
            }
            if (item instanceof Window) {
                ((Window) get(i)).dispose();
            }
            if (item instanceof CompleteObject) {
                ((CompleteObject) get(i)).finalize();
            }
            set(i, null);
        }
    }
}

(CompleteObject是我做的一个接口，让你指定你已经实现了很少实现的对象方法，如#finalize()， #hashCode()和#clone()))

因此，使用姐妹方法# setdestructivelyfinalizer(布尔值)，使用我的集合的程序可以(帮助)确保销毁对该集合的引用也会销毁对其内容的引用，并处理可能在无意中保持JVM活动的任何窗口。我也考虑过停止任何线程，但这打开了一个全新的蠕虫罐头。