The leak continues..

This again is a follow up of my previous post - The Interesting Leak.
I was quite amused after reading Markus' follow-up post An interesting leak when using WeakHashMaps.
What surprised me most was If you put

("abc" + "def").intern();

as key in the WeakHashMap, it doesn't get GC'd whereas

(new String("abc") + "def").intern()

as key leads to the entry being garbage collected.
Huh!
Tried all combinations. No clarity. Last resort - Pinged Rajiv.
And so went the conversation -

Me : If you put ("abc" + "def").intern(); as key, it doesnt get GC'd but if you put (new String("abc") + "def").intern() it gets GC'd
Rajiv : Decompile and see if "abc"+"def" is being converted to "abcdef" by javac
Me: Yes it is. So?
[This could be the clue. Am still thinking.. tick tick tick]

Rajiv: Check if "abcdef"== (new String("abc") + "def").intern()
Me: It is... printed the identitity hashcodes.
Rajiv: In the class you have both "abcdef" and (new String("abc") + "def").intern() and still
(new String("abc") + "def").intern() gets gc'ed?
Me: God! Then it doesn't get gc'd.
[Now Rajiv cracks it -]

Rajiv: "I think intern is weak map and constant pool has a strong ref"
Me: ohh!
Me: In that case (new String("abc") ).intern(); should get GC'd right? But we saw it doesn't. The maya happens only when someString is '+'d to (new String("abc")) and then the resultant String is interned.
Me: Just (new String("abc")).intern() doesnt get GC'd.
Rajiv: When you say (new String("abc")).intern() there is a string "abc" in constant pool.
Me: Yes "abc" in constant pool would be the literal we created and passed as argument to the String constructor.
Rajiv: (new String("abc")).intern() returns that string. So wont get gc'ed
Me: Oh yeah. Got it!
Me: So only when you do a "+" you get a String which is not there in constant pool and hence it gets GC'd ...
Rajiv: ya right.

I had earlier thought of intern pool and constant pool to be the same. But Rajiv 's prediction of intern being a weak map and constant pool holding a strong ref looks quite convincing.
Oo la.. That solved our mystery. Thanks Rajiv:-)