大多数人似乎忘记了在OOP中，类也是对象，所以它们有消息，出于某种原因，c#将其称为“静态方法”。 实例对象和类对象之间存在差异的事实只显示了语言中的缺陷或缺点。 对c#持乐观态度…

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。

Regarding static methods used in non-generic contexts I agree that it doesn't make much sense to allow them in interfaces, since you wouldn't be able to call them if you had a reference to the interface anyway. However there is a fundamental hole in the language design created by using interfaces NOT in a polymorphic context, but in a generic one. In this case the interface is not an interface at all but rather a constraint. Because C# has no concept of a constraint outside of an interface it is missing substantial functionality. Case in point:

T SumElements<T>(T initVal, T[] values)
{
    foreach (var v in values)
    {
        initVal += v;
    }
}

这里没有多态性，泛型使用对象的实际类型并调用+=操作符，但这失败了，因为它不能确定该操作符是否存在。简单的解决方案是在约束中指定它;简单的解决方案是不可能的，因为操作符是静态的，静态方法不能在接口中，(这就是问题所在)约束被表示为接口。

c#需要的是一个真正的约束类型，所有的接口都是约束，但不是所有的约束都是接口，然后你可以这样做:

constraint CHasPlusEquals
{
    static CHasPlusEquals operator + (CHasPlusEquals a, CHasPlusEquals b);
}

T SumElements<T>(T initVal, T[] values) where T : CHasPlusEquals
{
    foreach (var v in values)
    {
        initVal += v;
    }
}

已经有很多关于为所有数字类型创建i算术来实现的讨论，但是存在效率问题，因为约束不是多态构造，所以创建算术约束可以解决这个问题。

c#和CLR应该像Java一样支持接口中的静态方法。静态修饰符是契约定义的一部分，确实有意义，具体来说，行为和返回值不会基于实例而变化，尽管在不同调用之间仍然可能不同。

也就是说，当您想在接口中使用静态方法而又不能使用时，我建议您使用注释。您将得到您正在寻找的功能。

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; } }
}

这里的大多数答案似乎都没有抓住重点。多态性不仅可以在实例之间使用，还可以在类型之间使用。当我们使用泛型时，这是经常需要的。

假设我们在泛型方法中有类型参数，我们需要对它做一些操作。我们不想实例化，因为我们不知道构造函数。

例如:

Repository GetRepository<T>()
{
  //need to call T.IsQueryable, but can't!!!
  //need to call T.RowCount
  //need to call T.DoSomeStaticMath(int param)
}

...
var r = GetRepository<Customer>()

不幸的是，我只能想出一些“丑陋”的选择:

Use reflection Ugly and beats the idea of interfaces and polymorphism. Create completely separate factory class This might greatly increase the complexity of the code. For example, if we are trying to model domain objects, each object would need another repository class. Instantiate and then call the desired interface method This can be hard to implement even if we control the source for the classes, used as generic parameters. The reason is that, for example we might need the instances to be only in well-known, "connected to DB" state.

例子:

public class Customer 
{
  //create new customer
  public Customer(Transaction t) { ... }

  //open existing customer
  public Customer(Transaction t, int id) { ... }

  void SomeOtherMethod() 
  { 
    //do work...
  }
}

为了使用实例化来解决静态接口问题，我们需要做以下事情:

public class Customer: IDoSomeStaticMath
{
  //create new customer
  public Customer(Transaction t) { ... }

  //open existing customer
  public Customer(Transaction t, int id) { ... }

  //dummy instance
  public Customer() { IsDummy = true; }

  int DoSomeStaticMath(int a) { }

  void SomeOtherMethod() 
  { 
    if(!IsDummy) 
    {
      //do work...
    }
  }
}

这显然是丑陋的，也是不必要的，会使所有其他方法的代码复杂化。显然，这也不是一个优雅的解决方案!