program to an interface is a term from the GOF book. i would not directly say it has to do with java interface but rather real interfaces. to achieve clean layer separation, you need to create some separation between systems for example: Let's say you had a concrete database you want to use, you would never "program to the database" , instead you would "program to the storage interface". Likewise you would never "program to a Web Service" but rather you would program to a "client interface". this is so you can easily swap things out.

我发现这些规则对我很有帮助:

1. 当我们有多种类型的对象时，我们使用Java接口。如果我只有一个对象，我就看不到意义了。如果某个想法至少有两种具体实现，那么我会使用Java接口。

2. 如果如上所述，您希望从外部系统(存储系统)到自己的系统(本地DB)进行解耦，那么也需要使用接口。

注意有两种方法来考虑何时使用它们。

面向接口而不是实现的代码与Java无关，也与它的接口构造无关。

这个概念是在模式/四人帮的书中突出的，但很可能在那之前就已经存在了。这个概念在Java出现之前就已经存在了。

Java Interface构造的创建就是为了帮助实现这一想法(以及其他一些事情)，人们过于关注作为意义中心的构造，而不是最初的意图。然而，这也是为什么我们在Java、c++、c#等语言中有公共和私有方法和属性的原因。

It means just interact with an object or system's public interface. Don't worry or even anticipate how it does what it does internally. Don't worry about how it is implemented. In object-oriented code, it is why we have public vs. private methods/attributes. We are intended to use the public methods because the private methods are there only for use internally, within the class. They make up the implementation of the class and can be changed as required without changing the public interface. Assume that regarding functionality, a method on a class will perform the same operation with the same expected result every time you call it with the same parameters. It allows the author to change how the class works, its implementation, without breaking how people interact with it.

And you can program to the interface, not the implementation without ever using an Interface construct. You can program to the interface not the implementation in C++, which does not have an Interface construct. You can integrate two massive enterprise systems much more robustly as long as they interact through public interfaces (contracts) rather than calling methods on objects internal to the systems. The interfaces are expected to always react the same expected way given the same input parameters; if implemented to the interface and not the implementation. The concept works in many places.

不要认为Java接口与“面向接口编程，而不是面向实现”的概念有什么关系。它们可以帮助应用概念，但它们不是概念。

Using interfaces is a key factor in making your code easily testable in addition to removing unnecessary couplings between your classes. By creating an interface that defines the operations on your class, you allow classes that want to use that functionality the ability to use it without depending on your implementing class directly. If later on you decide to change and use a different implementation, you need only change the part of the code where the implementation is instantiated. The rest of the code need not change because it depends on the interface, not the implementing class.

This is very useful in creating unit tests. In the class under test you have it depend on the interface and inject an instance of the interface into the class (or a factory that allows it to build instances of the interface as needed) via the constructor or a property settor. The class uses the provided (or created) interface in its methods. When you go to write your tests, you can mock or fake the interface and provide an interface that responds with data configured in your unit test. You can do this because your class under test deals only with the interface, not your concrete implementation. Any class implementing the interface, including your mock or fake class, will do.

编辑:下面是一篇文章的链接，其中Erich Gamma讨论了他的引用，“面向接口编程，而不是面向实现编程。”

http://www.artima.com/lejava/articles/designprinciples.html

问:——……“你能使用任何实现接口的类吗?” A:是的。 问:——……“你什么时候需要这样做?” 答:-每次你都需要一个实现接口的类。

注意:我们不能实例化一个没有被类实现的接口- True。

为什么? 因为接口只有方法原型，没有定义(只有函数名，没有它们的逻辑)

AnIntf anInst = new class(); //我们可以这样做，只有当类实现AnIntf。 // anInst将有类引用。

注意:现在我们可以理解如果Bclass和Cclass实现相同的Dintf会发生什么。

Dintf bInst = new Bclass();  
// now we could call all Dintf functions implemented (defined) in Bclass.

Dintf cInst = new Cclass();  
// now we could call all Dintf functions implemented (defined) in Cclass.

我们拥有:相同的接口原型(接口中的函数名)，调用不同的实现。

参考书目: 原型——维基百科

我是这个问题的后来者，但我想在这里提到的是，在GoF (Gang of Four)设计模式一书中，“为接口编程，而不是为实现编程”这一行有一些很好的讨论。

它在第18页说:

针对接口编程，而不是针对实现编程 不要将变量声明为特定具体类的实例。相反，只提交到由抽象类定义的接口。你会发现这是本书设计模式的一个共同主题。

在此之上，它是这样开始的:

仅根据抽象类定义的接口来操作对象有两个好处: 客户端仍然不知道他们使用的对象的具体类型，只要对象遵循客户端期望的接口。 客户端仍然不知道实现这些对象的类。客户端只知道定义接口的抽象类。

So in other words, don't write it your classes so that it has a quack() method for ducks, and then a bark() method for dogs, because they are too specific for a particular implementation of a class (or subclass). Instead, write the method using names that are general enough to be used in the base class, such as giveSound() or move(), so that they can be used for ducks, dogs, or even cars, and then the client of your classes can just say .giveSound() rather than thinking about whether to use quack() or bark() or even determine the type before issuing the correct message to be sent to the object.

我坚信困难的问题应该用现实世界中简单的答案来解释。在软件设计领域，这是非常重要的。

看看你家里、学校、教堂的任何一扇门……任何建筑。

想象一下，有些门的底部有危险(所以你必须鞠躬才能与开门或关门的门互动)，

或者其他人只能坐在左上角(所以，一些侏儒、残疾人或凯文·哈特不会觉得这种门很有趣，也不会觉得它很好用)。

所以设计是关键，创建程序让其他人可以开发/使用它。

接口的作用是让大型项目中的初级/高级开发人员更容易工作，这样每个人都知道自己在做什么，而不需要别人的帮助，这样你就可以尽可能顺利地工作(理论上)。

[1]:如何?通过揭示价值的形态。所以，你不需要文档，因为代码本身是不言自明的(棒极了)。

这个答案并不是针对特定语言的，而是概念驱动的(毕竟，人类是通过编写代码来创建工具的)。