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

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;  

其他回答

在接口代表“契约”的程度上,静态类实现接口似乎是非常合理的。

上述论点似乎都忽略了合同的这一点。

从c# 9开始,接口中的静态方法是允许的(参见https://www.dotnetcurry.com/csharp/simpler-code-with-csharp-9)。

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…

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。

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)。