现在看到上面的答案，每个人都知道我们不能重写静态方法，但不应该误解从子类访问静态方法的概念。

我们可以通过子类引用访问超类的静态方法，如果这个静态方法没有被子类中定义的新静态方法所隐藏。

例如，请参见下面的代码:-

public class StaticMethodsHiding {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SubClass.hello();
    }
}


class SuperClass {
    static void hello(){
        System.out.println("SuperClass saying Hello");
    }
}


class SubClass extends SuperClass {
    // static void hello() {
    // System.out.println("SubClass Hello");
    // }
}

输出:

SuperClass saying Hello

关于在子类中隐藏静态方法的细节，请参阅Java oracle文档并搜索你可以在子类中做什么。

谢谢

通过重写，可以实现动态多态。 当您说覆盖静态方法时，您试图使用的词语是矛盾的。

静态表示-编译时，重写用于动态多态性。 两者在性质上是相反的，因此不能同时使用。

动态多态行为发生在程序员使用对象并访问实例方法时。JRE将根据您使用的对象类型映射不同类的不同实例方法。

当你说覆盖静态方法时，我们将使用类名访问静态方法，它将在编译时被链接，因此没有在运行时将方法与静态方法链接的概念。因此，术语“重写”静态方法本身没有任何意义。

注意:即使你用一个对象访问一个类方法，java编译器仍然有足够的智能来发现它，并会做静态链接。

重写依赖于类的实例。多态性的意义在于，您可以子类化一个类，而实现这些子类的对象对于父类中定义的相同方法将具有不同的行为(并且在子类中被重写)。静态方法不与类的任何实例相关联，因此这个概念不适用。

There were two considerations driving Java's design that impacted this. One was a concern with performance: there had been a lot of criticism of Smalltalk about it being too slow (garbage collection and polymorphic calls being part of that) and Java's creators were determined to avoid that. Another was the decision that the target audience for Java was C++ developers. Making static methods work the way they do had the benefit of familiarity for C++ programmers and was also very fast, because there's no need to wait until runtime to figure out which method to call.

通过重写，我们可以根据对象类型创建一个多态性质。静态方法与对象无关。因此java不支持静态方法重写。

Well... the answer is NO if you think from the perspective of how an overriden method should behave in Java. But, you don't get any compiler error if you try to override a static method. That means, if you try to override, Java doesn't stop you doing that; but you certainly don't get the same effect as you get for non-static methods. Overriding in Java simply means that the particular method would be called based on the run time type of the object and not on the compile time type of it (which is the case with overriden static methods). Okay... any guesses for the reason why do they behave strangely? Because they are class methods and hence access to them is always resolved during compile time only using the compile time type information. Accessing them using object references is just an extra liberty given by the designers of Java and we should certainly not think of stopping that practice only when they restrict it :-)

示例:让我们试着看看如果我们尝试重写一个静态方法会发生什么:-

class SuperClass {
// ......
public static void staticMethod() {
    System.out.println("SuperClass: inside staticMethod");
}
// ......
}

public class SubClass extends SuperClass {
// ......
// overriding the static method
public static void staticMethod() {
    System.out.println("SubClass: inside staticMethod");
}

// ......
public static void main(String[] args) {
    // ......
    SuperClass superClassWithSuperCons = new SuperClass();
    SuperClass superClassWithSubCons = new SubClass();
    SubClass subClassWithSubCons = new SubClass();

    superClassWithSuperCons.staticMethod();
    superClassWithSubCons.staticMethod();
    subClassWithSubCons.staticMethod();
    // ...
}
}

输出: SuperClass:在staticMethod内部 SuperClass:在staticMethod内部 子类:staticMethod内部

注意输出的第二行。如果staticMethod被重写，这一行应该与第三行相同，因为我们在运行时类型的对象上调用'staticMethod()'作为'子类'而不是'超类'。这证实了静态方法总是只使用它们的编译时类型信息进行解析。

一般来说，允许“重写”静态方法是没有意义的，因为没有好的方法来确定在运行时调用哪个方法。以Employee为例，如果我们调用regularemploee . getbonusmultiplier()——应该执行哪个方法?

以Java为例，人们可以想象这样一种语言定义:只要静态方法是通过对象实例调用的，就可以“覆盖”它们。然而，这样做只是重新实现常规的类方法，在没有真正带来任何好处的情况下为语言增加冗余。