假设你想要模拟当你试图睡觉时可能发生的烦恼。

接口前的模型

class Mosquito {
    void flyAroundYourHead(){}
}

class Neighbour{
    void startScreaming(){}
}

class LampJustOutsideYourWindow(){
    void shineJustThroughYourWindow() {}
}

正如你清楚地看到的，当你试图睡觉时，许多“事情”都可能令人讨厌。

使用没有接口的类

但是在使用这些类时，我们遇到了一个问题。他们毫无共同之处。您必须分别调用每个方法。

class TestAnnoyingThings{
    void testAnnoyingThinks(Mosquito mosquito, Neighbour neighbour, LampJustOutsideYourWindow lamp){
         if(mosquito != null){
             mosquito.flyAroundYourHead();
         }
         if(neighbour!= null){
             neighbour.startScreaming();
         }
         if(lamp!= null){
             lamp.shineJustThroughYourWindow();
         }
    }
}

带有接口的模型

为了克服这个问题，我们可以引入一个iterface

interface Annoying{
   public void annoy();

}

并在类中实现它

class Mosquito implements Annoying {
    void flyAroundYourHead(){}

    void annoy(){
        flyAroundYourHead();
    }
}

class Neighbour implements Annoying{
    void startScreaming(){}

    void annoy(){
        startScreaming();
    }
}

class LampJustOutsideYourWindow implements Annoying{
    void shineJustThroughYourWindow() {}

    void annoy(){
        shineJustThroughYourWindow();
    }
}

接口使用

这将使这些类的使用更容易

class TestAnnoyingThings{
    void testAnnoyingThinks(Annoying annoying){
        annoying.annoy();
    }
}

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。

作为一个。net开发人员，你完全有可能一辈子都不编写自己的接口。毕竟，没有它们，我们也活了几十年，我们的语言仍然是图灵完备的。

我不能告诉你为什么你需要接口，但我可以给你一个我们在当前项目中使用它们的列表:

在我们的插件模型中，我们通过接口加载插件，并将该接口提供给插件编写者以使其遵循。 在我们的机间消息传递系统中，消息类都实现了一个特定的接口，并使用该接口“解包装”。 我们的配置管理系统定义了一个用于设置和检索配置设置的接口。 我们使用一个接口来避免讨厌的循环引用问题。(如果没有必要，就不要这样做。)

我想如果有一个规则，那就是当你想在一个is-a关系中对几个类进行分组，但你不想在基类中提供任何实现时使用接口。

我喜欢军队的比喻。

中士不在乎你是软件开发人员、音乐家还是律师。 你被当作士兵对待。

对于中士来说，不去操心与他一起工作的人的具体细节更容易， 把每个人都当作抽象的士兵(…如果他们表现得不像孩子，就要惩罚他们)。

人们像士兵一样行动的能力被称为多态性。

接口是帮助实现多态的软件结构。

为了实现简单，需要抽象细节，这就是你问题的答案。

Polymorphism, which etymologically means "many forms," is the ability to treat an object of any subclass of a base class as if it were an object of the base class. A base class has, therefore, many forms: the base class itself, and any of its subclasses. (..) This makes your code easier for you to write and easier for others to understand. It also makes your code extensible, because other subclasses could be added later to the family of types, and objects of those new subclasses would also work with the existing code.

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.

与任何为系统增加灵活性的编程技术一样，接口也增加了一定程度的复杂性。它们通常都很好，而且你可以在任何地方使用它(你可以为你的所有类创建一个接口)——但是这样做，你会创建一个更复杂的系统，更难维护。

像往常一样，这里有一个权衡:灵活性胜过可维护性。哪个更重要?没有答案——这取决于项目本身。但是请记住，每个软件都需要维护……

所以我的建议是:在真正需要接口之前不要使用它们。(使用Visual Studio，你可以在2秒内从现有的类中提取一个接口——所以不要着急。)

话虽如此，你什么时候需要创建一个接口呢?

当我重构一个突然需要处理两个或多个类似类的方法时，我就会这样做。然后创建一个接口，将该接口分配给两个(或多个)类似的类，并更改方法参数类型(将类类型替换为接口类型)。

它是有效的:o)

一个例外:当我模拟对象时，接口更容易使用。我经常为此创建接口。

PS:当我写“接口”时，我的意思是:“任何基类的接口”，包括纯接口类。请注意，抽象类通常比纯接口更好，因为您可以向它们添加逻辑。

此致,Sylvain。