我真的不明白接口存在的原因。据我所知，这是c#中不存在的多继承的一种工作(至少我是这么被告知的)。
我所看到的是，您预定义了一些成员和函数，然后必须在类中再次重新定义它们。从而使接口成为冗余。它只是感觉像句法……嗯，垃圾对我来说(请没有冒犯的意思。Junk是指无用的东西)。
在下面的例子中，我将创建一个名为Pizza的基类，而不是一个接口。
简单示例(取自不同的堆栈溢出贡献)
public interface IPizza
{
public void Order();
}
public class PepperoniPizza : IPizza
{
public void Order()
{
//Order Pepperoni pizza
}
}
public class HawaiiPizza : IPizza
{
public void Order()
{
//Order HawaiiPizza
}
}
当前回答
考虑接口的最简单方法是认识继承的意义。如果类CC继承了类C，这意味着:
类CC可以使用类C的任何public或protected成员，就像它们是自己的一样，因此只需要实现父类中不存在的东西。 对CC的引用可以传递或分配给期望对C的引用的例程或变量。
遗传的这两个功能在某种意义上是相互独立的;虽然继承同时应用这两个，但也可以应用第二个而不应用第一个。这很有用，因为允许一个对象从两个或多个不相关的类继承成员要比允许一种类型可以替代多种类型复杂得多。
接口有点像抽象基类，但有一个关键的区别:继承基类的对象不能继承任何其他类。相反，一个对象可以实现一个接口，而不影响它继承任何所需类或实现任何其他接口的能力。
One nice feature of this (underutilized in the .net framework, IMHO) is that they make it possible to indicate declaratively the things an object can do. Some objects, for example, will want data-source object from which they can retrieve things by index (as is possible with a List), but they won't need to store anything there. Other routines will need a data-depository object where they can store things not by index (as with Collection.Add), but they won't need to read anything back. Some data types will allow access by index, but won't allow writing; others will allow writing, but won't allow access by index. Some, of course, will allow both.
If ReadableByIndex and Appendable were unrelated base classes, it would be impossible to define a type which could be passed both to things expecting a ReadableByIndex and things expecting an Appendable. One could try to mitigate this by having ReadableByIndex or Appendable derive from the other; the derived class would have to make available public members for both purposes, but warn that some public members might not actually work. Some of Microsoft's classes and interfaces do that, but that's rather icky. A cleaner approach is to have interfaces for the different purposes, and then have objects implement interfaces for the things they can actually do. If one had an interface IReadableByIndex and another interface IAppendable, classes which could do one or the other could implement the appropriate interfaces for the things they can do.
其他回答
考虑一下不控制或不拥有基类的情况。
以可视化控件为例，在。net for Winforms中，它们都继承自。net框架中完全定义的基类Control。
让我们假设您从事创建自定义控件的业务。你想要建立新的按钮，文本框，列表视图，网格，等等，你希望他们都有特定的功能独特的控件集。
例如，你可能想要一种通用的方法来处理主题，或者一种通用的方法来处理本地化。
在这种情况下，你不能“只创建一个基类”，因为如果你这样做，你必须重新实现所有与控件相关的东西。
相反，您将从按钮，TextBox, ListView, GridView等下降，并添加您的代码。
但这就产生了一个问题，你现在如何识别哪些控件是“你的”，你如何构建一些代码来表明“对于窗体上所有属于我的控件，将主题设置为X”。
输入接口。
接口是一种查看对象、确定对象是否遵守某种约定的方法。
您可以创建“YourButton”，从Button向下延伸，并添加对所需的所有接口的支持。
这将允许您编写如下代码:
foreach (Control ctrl in Controls)
{
if (ctrl is IMyThemableControl)
((IMyThemableControl)ctrl).SetTheme(newTheme);
}
如果没有接口，这是不可能的，相反，你必须写这样的代码:
foreach (Control ctrl in Controls)
{
if (ctrl is MyThemableButton)
((MyThemableButton)ctrl).SetTheme(newTheme);
else if (ctrl is MyThemableTextBox)
((MyThemableTextBox)ctrl).SetTheme(newTheme);
else if (ctrl is MyThemableGridView)
((MyThemableGridView)ctrl).SetTheme(newTheme);
else ....
}
考虑到你不能在c#中使用多重继承，然后再看看你的问题。
I share your sense that Interfaces are not necessary. Here is a quote from Cwalina pg 80 Framework Design Guidelines "I often here people saying that interfaces specify contracts. I believe this a dangerous myth. Interfaces by themselves do not specify much. ..." He and co-author Abrams managed 3 releases of .Net for Microsoft. He goes on to say that the 'contract' is "expressed" in an implementation of the class. IMHO watching this for decades, there were many people warning Microsoft that taking the engineering paradigm to the max in OLE/COM might seem good but its usefulness is more directly to hardware. Especially in a big way in the 80s and 90s getting interoperating standards codified. In our TCP/IP Internet world there is little appreciation of the hardware and software gymnastics we would jump through to get solutions 'wired up' between and among mainframes, minicomputers, and microprocessors of which PCs were just a small minority. So coding to interfaces and their protocols made computing work. And interfaces ruled. But what does solving making X.25 work with your application have in common with posting recipes for the holidays? I have been coding C++ and C# for many years and I never created one once.
我知道我已经迟到了。(差不多九年了)，但如果有人想要简单的解释，你可以这样说:
简单地说，当你知道一个对象可以做什么，或者我们要在一个对象上实现什么函数时，你就使用接口。使用实例插入、更新和删除。
interface ICRUD{
void InsertData(); // will insert data
void UpdateData(); // will update data
void DeleteData(); // will delete data
}
重要提示:接口总是公共的。
希望这能有所帮助。
关键是接口代表一个契约。任何实现类都必须拥有的一组公共方法。从技术上讲，接口只控制语法，即有什么方法，它们得到什么参数以及它们返回什么。通常它们也封装语义，尽管只是通过文档。
然后，您可以拥有一个接口的不同实现，并随意交换它们。在您的示例中，由于每个披萨实例都是IPizza，因此在处理未知披萨类型实例的任何地方都可以使用IPizza。任何类型继承自IPizza的实例都保证是可排序的，因为它有一个Order()方法。
Python is not statically-typed, therefore types are kept and looked up at runtime. So you can try calling an Order() method on any object. The runtime is happy as long as the object has such a method and probably just shrugs and says »Meh.« if it doesn't. Not so in C#. The compiler is responsible for making the correct calls and if it just has some random object the compiler doesn't know yet whether the instance during runtime will have that method. From the compiler's point of view it's invalid since it cannot verify it. (You can do such things with reflection or the dynamic keyword, but that's going a bit far right now, I guess.)
还要注意，通常意义上的接口不一定是c#接口，它也可以是一个抽象类，甚至是一个普通类(如果所有子类都需要共享一些公共代码，这可以派上用场——然而，在大多数情况下，接口就足够了)。
