另一位受访者(McDowell)说多态性只适用于对象实例。应该是有资格的;有些语言确实将类视为“类”或“元类”类型的实例。这些语言确实支持实例和类(静态)方法的多态性。

c#，就像之前的Java和c++一样，不是这样一种语言;static关键字显式地用于表示该方法是静态绑定的，而不是动态/虚拟的。

这里有一种情况，肯定需要继承静态字段和方法:

abstract class Animal
{
  protected static string[] legs;

  static Animal() {
    legs=new string[0];
  }

  public static void printLegs()
  {
    foreach (string leg in legs) {
      print(leg);
    }
  }
}


class Human: Animal
{
  static Human() {
    legs=new string[] {"left leg", "right leg"};
  }
}


class Dog: Animal
{
  static Dog() {
    legs=new string[] {"left foreleg", "right foreleg", "left hindleg", "right hindleg"};
  }
}


public static void main() {
  Dog.printLegs();
  Human.printLegs();
}


//what is the output?
//does each subclass get its own copy of the array "legs"?

我们实际上重写了静态方法(在delphi中)，这有点丑，但它很好地满足了我们的需求。

我们使用它，所以类可以有一个可用对象的列表，而不需要类实例，例如，我们有一个方法看起来像这样:

class function AvailableObjects: string; override;
begin
  Result := 'Object1, Object2';
end; 

它很丑，但却是必要的，这样我们就可以实例化需要的东西，而不是为了搜索可用的对象而对所有的类进行实例化。

这是一个简单的例子，但应用程序本身是一个客户机-服务器应用程序，它在一个服务器上拥有所有可用的类，而多个不同的客户机可能不需要服务器拥有的所有东西，也永远不需要对象实例。

因此，这比为每个客户机使用一个不同的服务器应用程序要容易得多。

希望这个例子很清楚。

静态方法不能被继承或重写，这就是为什么它们不能是抽象的。因为静态方法是在类的类型上定义的，而不是在类的实例上，所以必须在该类型上显式地调用它们。所以当你想要在子类上调用一个方法时，你需要使用它的名字来调用它。这使得继承无关紧要。

假设您可以暂时继承静态方法。想象一下这个场景:

public static class Base
{
    public static virtual int GetNumber() { return 5; }
}

public static class Child1 : Base
{
    public static override int GetNumber() { return 1; }
}

public static class Child2 : Base
{
    public static override int GetNumber() { return 2; }
}

如果调用Base.GetNumber()，将调用哪个方法?返回哪个值?很容易看出，如果不创建对象的实例，继承是相当困难的。没有继承的抽象方法只是没有主体的方法，因此不能被调用。

This question is 12 years old but it still needs to be given a better answer. As few noted in the comments and contrarily to what all answers pretend it would certainly make sense to have static abstract methods in C#. As philosopher Daniel Dennett put it, a failure of imagination is not an insight into necessity. There is a common mistake in not realizing that C# is not only an OOP language. A pure OOP perspective on a given concept leads to a restricted and in the current case misguided examination. Polymorphism is not only about subtying polymorphism: it also includes parametric polymorphism (aka generic programming) and C# has been supporting this for a long time now. Within this additional paradigm, abstract classes (and most types) are not only used to provide a type to instances. They can also be used as bounds for generic parameters; something that has been understood by users of certain languages (like for example Haskell, but also more recently Scala, Rust or Swift) for years.

在这种情况下，你可能想这样做:

void Catch<TAnimal>() where TAnimal : Animal
{
    string scientificName = TAnimal.ScientificName; // abstract static property
    Console.WriteLine($"Let's catch some {scientificName}");
    …
}

在这里，表达静态成员的能力可以被子类专门化，这是完全有意义的!

不幸的是，c#不允许抽象静态成员，但我想提出一个可以很好地模拟它们的模式。这个模式并不完美(它对继承施加了一些限制)，但据我所知，它是类型安全的。

主要思想是将一个抽象的同伴类(这里是SpeciesFor<TAnimal>)与一个应该包含静态抽象成员的类(这里是Animal)关联起来:

public abstract class SpeciesFor<TAnimal> where TAnimal : Animal
{
    public static SpeciesFor<TAnimal> Instance { get { … } }

    // abstract "static" members

    public abstract string ScientificName { get; }
    
    …
}

public abstract class Animal { … }

现在我们想让这个工作:

void Catch<TAnimal>() where TAnimal : Animal
{
    string scientificName = SpeciesFor<TAnimal>.Instance.ScientificName;
    Console.WriteLine($"Let's catch some {scientificName}");
    …
}

当然，我们有两个问题需要解决:

如何确保Animal的子类的实现者为这个子类提供了SpeciesFor<TAnimal>的特定实例? 属性SpeciesFor<TAnimal>。实例检索此信息?

下面是我们如何解决1:

public abstract class Animal<TSelf> where TSelf : Animal<TSelf>
{
    private Animal(…) {}
    
    public abstract class OfSpecies<TSpecies> : Animal<TSelf>
        where TSpecies : SpeciesFor<TSelf>, new()
    {
        protected OfSpecies(…) : base(…) { }
    }
    
    …
}

通过将Animal<TSelf>的构造函数设为private，我们可以确保它的所有子类也是内部类Animal<TSelf>. ofspecies <TSpecies>的子类。因此，这些子类必须指定具有new()边界的TSpecies类型。

对于2，我们可以提供以下实现:

public abstract class SpeciesFor<TAnimal> where TAnimal : Animal<TAnimal>
{
    private static SpeciesFor<TAnimal> _instance;

    public static SpeciesFor<TAnimal> Instance => _instance ??= MakeInstance();

    private static SpeciesFor<TAnimal> MakeInstance()
    {
        Type t = typeof(TAnimal);
        while (true)
        {
            if (t.IsConstructedGenericType
                    && t.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(Animal<>.OfSpecies<>))
                return (SpeciesFor<TAnimal>)Activator.CreateInstance(t.GenericTypeArguments[1]);
            t = t.BaseType;
            if (t == null)
                throw new InvalidProgramException();
        }
    }

    // abstract "static" members

    public abstract string ScientificName { get; }
    
    …
}

How do we know that the reflection code inside MakeInstance() never throws? As we've already said, almost all classes within the hierarchy of Animal<TSelf> are also subclasses of Animal<TSelf>.OfSpecies<TSpecies>. So we know that for these classes a specific TSpecies must be provided. This type is also necessarily constructible thanks to constraint : new(). But this still leaves out abstract types like Animal<Something> that have no associated species. Now we can convince ourself that the curiously recurring template pattern where TAnimal : Animal<TAnimal> makes it impossible to write SpeciesFor<Animal<Something>>.Instance as type Animal<Something> is never a subtype of Animal<Animal<Something>>.

就是这样:

public class CatSpecies : SpeciesFor<Cat>
{
    // overriden "static" members

    public override string ScientificName => "Felis catus";
    public override Cat CreateInVivoFromDnaTrappedInAmber() { … }
    public override Cat Clone(Cat a) { … }
    public override Cat Breed(Cat a1, Cat a2) { … }
}

public class Cat : Animal<Cat>.OfSpecies<CatSpecies>
{
    // overriden members

    public override string CuteName { get { … } }
}

public class DogSpecies : SpeciesFor<Dog>
{
    // overriden "static" members

    public override string ScientificName => "Canis lupus familiaris";
    public override Dog CreateInVivoFromDnaTrappedInAmber() { … }
    public override Dog Clone(Dog a) { … }
    public override Dog Breed(Dog a1, Dog a2) { … }
}

public class Dog : Animal<Dog>.OfSpecies<DogSpecies>
{
    // overriden members

    public override string CuteName { get { … } }
}

public class Program
{
    public static void Main()
    {
        ConductCrazyScientificExperimentsWith<Cat>();
        ConductCrazyScientificExperimentsWith<Dog>();
        ConductCrazyScientificExperimentsWith<Tyranosaurus>();
        ConductCrazyScientificExperimentsWith<Wyvern>();
    }
    
    public static void ConductCrazyScientificExperimentsWith<TAnimal>()
        where TAnimal : Animal<TAnimal>
    {
        // Look Ma! No animal instance polymorphism!
        
        TAnimal a2039 = SpeciesFor<TAnimal>.Instance.CreateInVivoFromDnaTrappedInAmber();
        TAnimal a2988 = SpeciesFor<TAnimal>.Instance.CreateInVivoFromDnaTrappedInAmber();
        TAnimal a0400 = SpeciesFor<TAnimal>.Instance.Clone(a2988);
        TAnimal a9477 = SpeciesFor<TAnimal>.Instance.Breed(a0400, a2039);
        TAnimal a9404 = SpeciesFor<TAnimal>.Instance.Breed(a2988, a9477);
        
        Console.WriteLine(
            "The confederation of mad scientists is happy to announce the birth " +
            $"of {a9404.CuteName}, our new {SpeciesFor<TAnimal>.Instance.ScientificName}.");
    }
}

这种模式的一个限制是不可能(据我所知)以令人满意的方式扩展类层次结构。例如，我们不能引入与MammalClass伙伴相关联的中介哺乳类。另一个原因是它不适用于接口中的静态成员，而接口比抽象类更灵活。

在。net 6 / c# 10/next/preview中，你可以通过“接口中的静态抽象成员”来做到这一点。

(在编写代码时编译成功，但一些ide有突出显示代码的问题)

SharpLab演示

using System;

namespace StaticAbstractTesting
{
    public interface ISomeAbstractInterface
    {
        public abstract static string CallMe();
    }

    public class MyClassA : ISomeAbstractInterface
    {
        static string ISomeAbstractInterface.CallMe()
        {
            return "You called ClassA";
        }
    }

    public class MyClassB : ISomeAbstractInterface
    {
        static string ISomeAbstractInterface.CallMe()
        {
            return "You called ClassB";
        }
    }

    public class Program
    {

        public static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            UseStaticClassMethod<MyClassA>();
            UseStaticClassMethod<MyClassB>();
        }

        public static void UseStaticClassMethod<T>() where T : ISomeAbstractInterface
        {
            Console.WriteLine($"{typeof(T).Name}.CallMe() result: {T.CallMe()}");
        }
    }
}

由于这是运行时中的一个主要更改，因此产生的IL代码看起来也非常干净，这意味着这不仅仅是语法糖。

public static void UseStaticClassMethodSimple<T>() where T : ISomeAbstractInterface {
IL_0000: constrained. !!T
IL_0006: call string StaticAbstractTesting.ISomeAbstractInterface::CallMe()
IL_000b: call void [System.Console]System.Console::WriteLine(string)
IL_0010: ret
}

资源:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/compatibility/core-libraries/6.0/static-abstract-interface-methods https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/4436