为什么c#是这样设计的?

根据我的理解,一个接口只描述行为,并且服务于描述实现接口的类的契约义务。

如果类希望在共享方法中实现这种行为,为什么不应该呢?

以下是我想到的一个例子:

// These items will be displayed in a list on the screen.
public interface IListItem {
  string ScreenName();
  ...
}

public class Animal: IListItem {
    // All animals will be called "Animal".
    public static string ScreenName() {
        return "Animal";
    }
....
}

public class Person: IListItem {

    private string name;

    // All persons will be called by their individual names.
    public string ScreenName() {
        return name;
    }

    ....

 }

当前回答

假设你在问为什么你不能这样做:

public interface IFoo {
    void Bar();
}

public class Foo: IFoo {
    public static void Bar() {}
}

This doesn't make sense to me, semantically. Methods specified on an interface should be there to specify the contract for interacting with an object. Static methods do not allow you to interact with an object - if you find yourself in the position where your implementation could be made static, you may need to ask yourself if that method really belongs in the interface. To implement your example, I would give Animal a const property, which would still allow it to be accessed from a static context, and return that value in the implementation.

public class Animal: IListItem {
    /* Can be tough to come up with a different, yet meaningful name!
     * A different casing convention, like Java has, would help here.
     */
    public const string AnimalScreenName = "Animal";
    public string ScreenName(){ return AnimalScreenName; }
}

对于更复杂的情况,您总是可以声明另一个静态方法并委托给它。在尝试给出一个例子的过程中,我想不出您在静态和实例上下文中都要做一些非平凡的事情的任何理由,因此我将给您一个FooBar blob,并将其作为它可能不是一个好主意的指示。

其他回答

接口是已定义可用功能的抽象集合。

该接口中的方法是否表现为静态行为是应该隐藏在接口后面的实现细节。将接口方法定义为静态是错误的,因为您将不必要地强制该方法以某种方式实现。

如果方法被定义为静态的,那么实现接口的类就不会像它应该的那样被封装。在面向对象设计中,封装是一件值得努力的事情(我不会详细说明原因,你可以在这里阅读:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented)。因此,在接口中不允许使用静态方法。

我猜这是短视。

在最初设计时,接口仅用于类的实例

IMyInterface val = GetObjectImplementingIMyInterface();
val.SomeThingDefinedinInterface();

只有引入接口作为泛型的约束,向接口中添加静态方法才有实际用途。

(回复评论:)我认为现在更改它需要更改CLR,这将导致与现有程序集不兼容。

供您参考:您可以通过为接口创建扩展方法来获得与您想要的类似的行为。扩展方法将是一个共享的、不可覆盖的静态行为。然而,不幸的是,这个静态方法不是契约的一部分。

因为接口的目的是允许多态性,能够传递任意数量的已定义类的实例,这些类都已定义,以实现已定义的接口……确保在多态调用中,代码能够找到您正在调用的方法。允许静态方法实现接口是没有意义的,

你怎么称呼它??


public interface MyInterface { void MyMethod(); }
public class MyClass: MyInterface
{
    public static void MyMethod() { //Do Something; }
}

 // inside of some other class ...  
 // How would you call the method on the interface ???
    MyClass.MyMethod();  // this calls the method normally 
                         // not through the interface...

    // This next fails you can't cast a classname to a different type... 
    // Only instances can be Cast to a different type...
    MyInterface myItf = MyClass as MyInterface;  

I think the question is getting at the fact that C# needs another keyword, for precisely this sort of situation. You want a method whose return value depends only on the type on which it is called. You can't call it "static" if said type is unknown. But once the type becomes known, it will become static. "Unresolved static" is the idea -- it's not static yet, but once we know the receiving type, it will be. This is a perfectly good concept, which is why programmers keep asking for it. But it didn't quite fit into the way the designers thought about the language.

因为它不可用,所以我采用如下所示的方式使用非静态方法。虽然不太理想,但至少对我来说,我找不到比这更有意义的方法了。

public interface IZeroWrapper<TNumber> {
  TNumber Zero {get;}
}

public class DoubleWrapper: IZeroWrapper<double> {
  public double Zero { get { return 0; } }
}