Why can't a method be virtual AND static at the same time?

[Martin Cejp]

On Wednesday, 29 January 2014 at 15:21:54 UTC, Frustrated wrote:
> No, you are mixing concepts. Logger.print is a function that 
> uses
> a vtable and takes a hidden parameter this.
>
> ConsoleLogger.print is a regular function that is not in a
> vtable(because it is static) and does not take a hidden
> parameter(again, because it is static).
>
> So, when you do ConsoleLogger.print how the heck would the
> compiler know which one you meant to use? While this might have 
> a
> solution, in some cases in general a virtual method REQUIRES a
> virtual table and by using the keyword static on a function you
> are saying it is not part of the virtual table.
>
Guess what: I DON'T CARE.
No really, I don't care at all about the implementation details.
If you look at it from the purely semantic view, there's no 
ambiguity: got an instance? call the instance method. no 
instance? call the static one.

Technically, yes, there would need to be two methods generated 
because of ABI differences, but this could be done behind the 
scenes. By making a method both override and static, you'd tell 
the compiler to do exactly that. Of course, the question is 
whether this would really be worth implementing and based on the 
reactions so far, I guess the answer is Not at all. I'm surprised 
that nobody else misses this feature, though.