它有助于控制名称空间污染。

我希望您已经理解了静态方法和实例方法之间的区别。而且，答案可以有长有短。其他人已经给出了很长的答案。

我的简短回答是:是的，你可以像ReSharper建议的那样将它们转换为静态方法。这样做没有坏处。相反，通过将方法设置为静态，实际上是在保护该方法，这样就不会不必要地将任何实例成员插入该方法。通过这种方式，您可以实现OOP原则“最小化类和成员的可访问性”。

When ReSharper is suggesting that an instance method can be converted to a static one, it is actually telling you, "Why the .. this method is sitting in this class but it is not actually using any of its states?" So, it gives you food for thought. Then, it is you who can realize the need for moving that method to a static utility class or not. According to the SOLID principles, a class should have only one core responsibility. So, you can do a better cleanup of your classes in that way. Sometimes, you do need some helper methods even in your instance class. If that is the case, you may keep them within a #region helper.

它有助于控制名称空间污染。

您应该在给定的场景中使用最易读和最直观的方法。

除了在最极端的情况下，性能参数并不是一个好的参数，因为实际发生的唯一事情是将一个额外的参数(this)推入到实例方法的堆栈中。

对于类中的复杂逻辑，我发现私有静态方法在创建隔离逻辑时很有用，其中实例输入在方法签名中明确定义，并且不会发生实例副作用。所有输出必须通过返回值或out/ref参数。将复杂的逻辑分解成无副作用的代码块可以提高代码的可读性和开发团队对它的信心。

另一方面，它可能导致类被大量实用方法所污染。通常，逻辑命名、文档和团队编码约定的一致应用程序可以缓解这种情况。

Just to add to @Jason True's answer, it is important to realise that just putting 'static' on a method doesn't guarantee that the method will be 'pure'. It will be stateless with regard to the class in which it is declared, but it may well access other 'static' objects which have state (application configuration etc.), this may not always be a bad thing, but one of the reasons that I personally tend to prefer static methods when I can is that if they are pure, you can test and reason about them in isolation, without having to worry about the surrounding state.