这个问题的答案很简单，标记为静态的方法或变量只属于类，因此静态方法不能在子类中继承，因为它们只属于超类。

简单的解决方案:使用单例实例。它将允许重写和继承。

在我的系统中，我有SingletonsRegistry类，它为传递的class返回实例。如果没有找到instance，则创建它。

Haxe语言类:

package rflib.common.utils;
import haxe.ds.ObjectMap;



class SingletonsRegistry
{
  public static var instances:Map<Class<Dynamic>, Dynamic>;

  static function __init__()
  {
    StaticsInitializer.addCallback(SingletonsRegistry, function()
    {
      instances = null;
    });

  } 

  public static function getInstance(cls:Class<Dynamic>, ?args:Array<Dynamic>)
  {
    if (instances == null) {
      instances = untyped new ObjectMap<Dynamic, Dynamic>();      
    }

    if (!instances.exists(cls)) 
    {
      if (args == null) args = [];
      instances.set(cls, Type.createInstance(cls, args));
    }

    return instances.get(cls);
  }


  public static function validate(inst:Dynamic, cls:Class<Dynamic>)
  {
    if (instances == null) return;

    var inst2 = instances[cls];
    if (inst2 != null && inst != inst2) throw "Can\'t create multiple instances of " + Type.getClassName(cls) + " - it's singleton!";
  }

}

方法重写可以通过动态调度实现，这意味着对象的声明类型不决定其行为，而是决定其运行时类型:

Animal lassie = new Dog();
lassie.speak(); // outputs "woof!"
Animal kermit = new Frog();
kermit.speak(); // outputs "ribbit!"

尽管lassie和kermit都声明为Animal类型的对象，但它们的行为(method .speak())会有所不同，因为动态调度只会在运行时将方法调用.speak()绑定到实现，而不是在编译时。

现在，这里是静态关键字开始有意义的地方:单词“静态”是“动态”的反义词。所以你不能重写静态方法的原因是因为静态成员上没有动态分派——因为静态字面上的意思是“非动态的”。如果它们是动态分派的(因此可以被重写)，静态关键字就没有意义了。

重写是为实例成员保留的，以支持多态行为。静态类成员不属于特定实例。相反，静态成员属于类，因此不支持重写，因为子类只继承受保护和公共实例成员，而不继承静态成员。您可能希望定义一个接口，并研究工厂和/或策略设计模式，以评估替代方法。

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.

Here is a simple explanation. A static method is associated with a class while an instance method is associated with a particular object. Overrides allow calling the different implementation of the overridden methods associated with the particular object. So it is counter-intuitive to override static method which is not even associated with objects but the class itself in the first place. So static methods cannot be overridden based on what object is calling it, it will always be associated with the class where it was created.