To me an advantage/benefit of an interface is that it is more flexible than an abstract class. Since you can only inherit 1 abstract class but you can implement multiple interfaces, changes to a system that inherits an abstract class in many places becomes problematic. If it is inherited in 100 places, a change requires changes to all 100. But, with the interface, you can place the new change in a new interface and just use that interface where its needed (Interface Seq. from SOLID). Additionally, the memory usage seems like it would be less with the interface as an object in the interface example is used just once in memory despite how many places implement the interface.

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.

接口也可以通过菊花链来创建另一个接口。这种实现多个接口的能力使开发人员可以在不改变当前类功能的情况下向类中添加功能(SOLID原则)

O = "类应该对扩展开放，对修改关闭"

这么多答案! 尽我所能。呵呵。

首先，你可以使用一个具体的基类和派生类。在这种情况下，你将不得不在基类中为Prepare方法做一个空的或无用的实现，同时使这个方法为虚的，然后派生类将为自己重写这个Prepare方法。在这种情况下，在基类中实现Prepare是无用的。

选择使用接口的原因是必须定义契约，而不是实现。

有一个IPizza类型，它提供了一个功能来准备。这是合同。它是如何准备的是实现，这不是你的把关。这是各种Pizza实现的责任。 这里首选接口或抽象类而不是具体基类，因为您必须创建一个抽象，即Prepare方法。不能在具体基类中创建抽象方法。

现在你可能会说，为什么不用抽象类呢?

所以，当你需要实现100%的抽象时，你需要使用接口。但是当你需要一些抽象和具体的实现时，选择抽象类。它的意思。

例子:假设你所有的披萨都有底料，底料的准备过程是相同的。然而，所有披萨的种类和配料都有所不同。在这种情况下，您可以使用一个抽象方法Prepare和一个具体方法PreparePizzaBase创建一个抽象类。

public abstract class Pizza{
    // concrete method which is common to all pizzas.
    public PizzaBase PreparePizzaBase(){
        // code for pizza base preparation.
    }
    public abstract void Prepare();
}

public class DeluxePizza: Pizza{
    public void Prepare(){
        var base=PreparePizzaBase();
        // prepare deluxe pizza on pizza base.
    }
}

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。

你会得到界面，当你需要他们:)你可以研究例子，但你需要的是啊哈!效果才能真正得到他们。

现在您已经知道了接口是什么，只需编写没有接口的代码。您迟早会遇到一个问题，在这个问题中使用接口将是最自然的事情。