Override static calss in c#

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

C#3.5

Hello All,

Can any one tell me how to override static calss in c# 3.5.Waiting for reply.

Regards,
Shameen

Posted 11-Oct-11 0:34am

shameen.cp

Add a Solution

1 solution

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

OriginalGriff · Answer 1 · 2011-10-11T00:42:00

Solution 1

You can't - static items cannot be overridden. There is a good explanation why not here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/kirillosenkov/archive/2008/02/06/how-to-override-static-methods.aspx[^]

Posted 11-Oct-11 0:42am

OriginalGriff

Comments

Mehdi Gholam 11-Oct-11 6:54am

My 5!

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 17-Nov-11 22:48pm

Here is the thing: this explanation is wrong; technologies where static methods can be virtual and can be overridden do exist (take Object Pascal and Delphi, for example) and it makes perfect sense. I can easily explain why it does not contradict to anything at all and how it's useful (well, very). .NET just uses a bit different model (despite its inheritance from Delphi), and this model is not better, just different.

At to the author of this article, it looks like he was just dominated by the uncomfortable fact of having this .NET model not rationally explained and desire to give some explanation. The explanation is artificial, an attempt to force logic to the "fact".

(I did not vote, because it can be considered as contradictory matter and not well known; not finding a logical flaw is not a good reason for down-voting.)
--SA