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;
}
....
}
一个静态类是用c#实现的,微软用静态元素创建了一个特殊的类实例,这只是实现静态功能的一个奇怪之处。这不是一个理论观点。
接口应该是类接口的描述符——或者它是如何与之交互的,并且应该包括静态的交互。接口的一般定义(来自merriam - webster):不同事物相遇、交流或相互影响的地方或区域。当您完全忽略类的静态组件或静态类时,我们就忽略了这些坏家伙如何交互的大部分内容。
下面是一个非常清晰的例子,说明了在静态类中使用接口是非常有用的:
public interface ICrudModel<T, Tk>
{
Boolean Create(T obj);
T Retrieve(Tk key);
Boolean Update(T obj);
Boolean Delete(T obj);
}
目前,我在编写包含这些方法的静态类时没有进行任何检查,以确保我没有忘记任何东西。就像在面向对象编程之前的糟糕的编程时代。
我知道这是个老问题,但很有趣。这个例子并不是最好的。我认为如果你展示一个用例会更清楚:
string DoSomething<T>() where T:ISomeFunction
{
if (T.someFunction())
...
}
仅仅使用静态方法实现接口并不能达到你想要的效果;所需要的是将静态成员作为接口的一部分。我当然可以想象出许多用例,特别是当它能够创建东西的时候。我可以提供两种可能有用的方法:
Create a static generic class whose type parameter will be the type you'd be passing to DoSomething above. Each variation of this class will have one or more static members holding stuff related to that type. This information could supplied either by having each class of interest call a "register information" routine, or by using Reflection to get the information when the class variation's static constructor is run. I believe the latter approach is used by things like Comparer<T>.Default().
For each class T of interest, define a class or struct which implements IGetWhateverClassInfo<T> and satisfies a "new" constraint. The class won't actually contain any fields, but will have a static property which returns a static field with the type information. Pass the type of that class or struct to the generic routine in question, which will be able to create an instance and use it to get information about the other class. If you use a class for this purpose, you should probably define a static generic class as indicated above, to avoid having to construct a new descriptor-object instance each time. If you use a struct, instantiation cost should be nil, but every different struct type would require a different expansion of the DoSomething routine.
这些方法都不太吸引人。另一方面,我希望如果CLR中存在能够干净地提供这类功能的机制,.net将允许指定参数化的“new”约束(因为知道一个类是否具有具有特定签名的构造函数似乎与知道它是否具有具有特定签名的静态方法在难度上相当)。
这里有一个需要类型方法的例子。我正在创建一组基于源XML的类之一。所以我有一个
static public bool IsHandled(XElement xml)
函数,在每个类上依次调用。
函数应该是静态的,否则我们会浪费时间创建不合适的对象。
正如@Ian Boyde指出的那样,它可以在工厂类中完成,但这只会增加复杂性。
最好将它添加到接口中,以强制类实现者实现它。这不会造成很大的开销——它只是一个编译/链接时间检查,不会影响虚表。
然而,这也将是一个相当小的改进。由于方法是静态的,我作为调用者,必须显式地调用它,因此如果它没有实现,就会立即得到编译错误。允许在接口上指定它将意味着这个错误在开发周期中稍微提前出现,但与其他损坏的接口问题相比,这是微不足道的。
所以这是一个次要的潜在特性,总的来说最好还是忽略不计。
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; } }
}