最简单的例子就是支付处理器。(Paypal, PDS等)。

假设您创建了一个具有ProcessACH和ProcessCreditCard方法的接口IPaymentProcessor。

现在可以实现一个具体的Paypal实现。让这些方法调用PayPal特定的函数。

如果你决定以后需要换到另一个提供商，你可以这样做。只需为新提供程序创建另一个具体实现。由于您所绑定的只是您的接口(契约)，因此您可以在不更改使用它的代码的情况下切换应用程序使用的接口。

别太担心。很多开发人员很少需要编写接口。您将经常使用. net框架中可用的接口，但如果您觉得没有必要在短时间内编写一个接口，这也没什么好奇怪的。

我经常给别人的例子是，如果你有一个帆船职业和一个毒蛇职业。它们分别继承了Boat类和Car类。现在假设您需要遍历所有这些对象并调用它们的Drive()方法。你也可以编写如下代码:

if(myObject is Boat)
    ((Boat)myObject).Drive()
else
    if (myObject is Car)
        ((Car)myObject).Drive()

这样写会简单得多:

((IDrivable)myObject).Drive()

In my experience the driving force to create interfaces didn't occur until I start doing unit testing with a mocking framework. It became abundantly clear that using interfaces was going to make mocking much easier (since the framework depended on the methods being virtual). Once I started I saw the value of abstracting away the interface to my class from the implementation. Even if I don't create an actual interface, I try now to make my methods virtual (providing an implicit interface that can be overridden).

我发现还有许多其他原因可以加强重构到接口的良好实践，但是单元测试/模拟的事情提供了最初的“顿悟时刻”的实践经验。

EDIT: To clarify, with unit testing and mocking I always have two implementations -- the real, concrete implementation and an alternate mock implementation used in testing. Once you have two implementations, the value of the interface becomes obvious -- deal with it in terms of the interface so you can replace the implementation at any time. In this case I'm replacing it with a mock interface. I know that I can do this without an actual interface if my class is constructed properly, but using an actual interface reinforces this and makes it cleaner (clearer to the reader). Without this impetus, I don't think I would have appreciated the value of interfaces since most of my classes only, ever have a single concrete implementation.

如果浏览. net Framework程序集并深入到任何标准对象的基类中，您将注意到许多接口(名为ISomeName的成员)。

Interfaces are basically for implementing frameworks, large or small. I felt the same way about interfaces until I wanted to write a framework of my own. I also found that understanding interfaces helped me learn frameworks much more rapidly. The moment that you want to write a more elegant solution for just about anything, you will find that an interface makes a lot of sense. It's like a method of letting a class put on the appropriate clothes for the job. More importantly, interfaces allow systems to become much more self-documenting, because complex objects become less complex when the class implements interfaces, which helps to categorize its functionality.

类在希望能够显式或隐式地参与框架时实现接口。例如，IDisposable是一个公共接口，它为流行且有用的Dispose()方法提供方法签名。在框架中，您或其他开发人员需要知道的关于类的所有信息是，如果它实现了IDisposable，那么您就知道((IDisposable)myObject). dispose()可用于清理目的。

经典示例:在没有实现IDisposable接口的情况下，你不能在c#中使用"using()"关键字构造，因为它要求任何指定为参数的对象都可以隐式转换为IDisposable。

复杂的例子: 一个更复杂的例子是System.ComponentModel.Component类。这个类同时实现了IDisposable和IComponent。大多数(如果不是全部的话)具有与之关联的可视化设计器的. net对象实现了IComponent，以便IDE能够与组件交互。

CONCLUSION: As you become more familiar with the .NET Framework, the first thing you will do when encountering a new class in the Object Browser or within the .NET Reflector (free) tool (http://www.red-gate.com/products/reflector/) is to check to see which class it inherits from and also the interfaces that it implements. .NET Reflector is even better than the Object Browser because it lets you see the Derived classes as well. That allows you to learn about all objects that derive from a particular class, thereby potentially learning about framework functionality that you did not know existed. This is particularly significant when updated or new namespaces are added to the .NET Framework.

I like Jimmy's answer a lot, but I feel I need to add something to it. The key to the whole thing is the "able" in IProcessable . It indicates a capability (or property, but meaning "intrinsic quality", not in the sense of C# properties) of the object that implements the interface. IAnimal is probably not a good example for an interface, but IWalkable might be a good interface to have if your system has many things that can walk. You might have classes derived from Animal such as Dog, Cow, Fish, Snake. The first two would probably implement IWalkable, the latter two don't walk, so they wouldn't. Now you ask "why not just have another superclass, WalkingAnimal, that Dog and Cow derive from?". The answer is when you have something completely outside the inheritance tree that also can walk, such as a robot. Robot would implement IWalkable, but probably wouldn't derive from Animal. If you want a list of things that can walk, you type it as IWalkable and you can put all walking animals plus robots in the list.

现在，将IWalkable替换为IPersistable这样更像软件的东西，这样的类比就更接近你在实际程序中看到的情况了。

使用接口有很多目的。

Use in polymorphic behavior. Where you want to call specific methods of a child class with an inteface having a reference to the child class. Having a contract with classes to implement all of the methods where it is necessary, like most common use is with COM objects , where a wrapper class is generated on a DLL which inherits the interface; these methods are called behind the scenes, and you just need to implement them but with the same structure as defined in the COM DLL which you can only know through the interface that they expose. To reduce memory usage by loading specific methods in a class. Like if you have three business objects and they are implemented in a single class, you can use three interfaces.

例如IUser, IOrder, IOrderItem

public interface IUser()
{

void AddUser(string name ,string fname);

}

// Same for IOrder and IOrderItem
//


public class  BusinessLayer: IUser, IOrder, IOrderItem

{    
    public void AddUser(string name ,string fname)
    {
        // Do stuffs here.
    }

    // All methods from all interfaces must be implemented.

}

如果你只想添加一个用户，可以这样做:

IUser user = new (IUser)BusinessLayer();

// It will load  all methods into memory which are declared in the IUser interface.

user.AddUser();