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)。

您想要的是允许通过Type或该类型的任何实例调用静态方法。这至少会导致歧义，这不是一个理想的特征。

关于这是否重要，这是最佳实践，以及这样做是否存在性能问题，将会有无休止的争论。通过简单地不支持它，c#使我们不必担心它。

遵循这一愿望的编译器也可能会失去一些优化，而这些优化可能会带来实例方法和静态方法之间更严格的分离。

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。

举一个例子，我既没有接口方法的静态实现，也没有Mark Brackett介绍的“所谓的类型方法”:

当从数据库存储中读取数据时，我们有一个通用的DataTable类来处理从任何结构的表中读取数据。所有特定于表的信息都放在每个表的一个类中，每个表还保存来自DB的一行的数据，并且必须实现IDataRow接口。IDataRow中包含了要从数据库中读取的表的结构描述。DataTable在从DB中读取数据之前必须向IDataRow请求数据结构。目前看起来是这样的:

interface IDataRow {
  string GetDataSTructre();  // How to read data from the DB
  void Read(IDBDataRow);     // How to populate this datarow from DB data
}

public class DataTable<T> : List<T> where T : IDataRow {

  public string GetDataStructure()
    // Desired: Static or Type method:
    // return (T.GetDataStructure());
    // Required: Instantiate a new class:
    return (new T().GetDataStructure());
  }

}

每个表只需要读取一次GetDataStructure，实例化一个实例的开销是最小的。但是，在这种情况下它会很好。

我认为简单的答案是“因为它毫无用处”。 要调用接口方法，需要该类型的实例。从实例方法中，您可以调用任何您想要的静态方法。

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。