接口编程与我们在Java或。net中看到的抽象接口完全没有关系。它甚至不是面向对象的概念。

它的意思是不要乱动对象或数据结构的内部结构。使用抽象程序接口(API)与数据交互。在Java或c#中，这意味着使用公共属性和方法，而不是原始字段访问。对于C语言来说，这意味着使用函数而不是原始指针。

EDIT:对于数据库，这意味着使用视图和存储过程，而不是直接访问表。

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。

当您拥有一组类似的类时，它使您的代码更具可扩展性，更容易维护。我是一个初级程序员，所以我不是专家，但我刚刚完成了一个需要类似东西的项目。

我从事与运行医疗设备的服务器对话的客户端软件工作。我们正在开发这种设备的新版本，其中有一些新组件，客户必须不时进行配置。有两种类型的新组件，它们是不同的，但也非常相似。基本上，我必须创建两个配置表单，两个列表类，所有东西都要创建两个。

我决定最好是为每个控件类型创建一个抽象基类，它可以容纳几乎所有的实际逻辑，然后是派生类型，以处理两个组件之间的差异。然而，如果我不得不一直担心类型，基类就不能在这些组件上执行操作(好吧，它们可以，但每个方法中都有一个“if”语句或开关)。

我为这些组件定义了一个简单的接口，所有基类都与该接口对话。现在当我改变一些东西，它几乎“只是工作”在任何地方，我没有代码复制。

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

前面的回答主要关注为了可扩展性和松耦合而对抽象进行编程。虽然这些都很重要， 可读性同样重要。可读性允许其他人(以及您未来的自己)以最小的努力理解代码。这就是可读性利用抽象的原因。

根据定义，抽象比实现更简单。抽象省略了细节以传达事物的本质或目的，仅此而已。 由于抽象更简单，与实现相比，我可以一次在脑海中容纳更多的抽象。

作为一名程序员(使用任何语言)，我的脑海中始终有一个List的大致概念。特别是，List允许随机访问、重复元素并保持顺序。当我看到这样的声明:List myList = new ArrayList()我想，很酷，这是一个以我理解的(基本)方式使用的List;我就不用再想了

On the other hand, I do not carry around the specific implementation details of ArrayList in my head. So when I see, ArrayList myList = new ArrayList(). I think, uh-oh, this ArrayList must be used in a way that isn't covered by the List interface. Now I have to track down all the usages of this ArrayList to understand why, because otherwise I won't be able to fully understand this code. It gets even more confusing when I discover that 100% of the usages of this ArrayList do conform to the List interface. Then I'm left wondering... was there some code relying on ArrayList implementation details that got deleted? Was the programmer who instantiated it just incompetent? Is this application locked into that specific implementation in some way at runtime? A way that I don't understand?

我现在对这个应用程序感到困惑和不确定，我们所讨论的只是一个简单的List。如果这是一个忽略其接口的复杂业务对象呢?那么我的业务领域知识不足以理解代码的目的。

因此，即使当我在私有方法中严格需要List时(如果它改变了，不会破坏其他应用程序，并且我可以很容易地找到/替换IDE中的每个用法)，它仍然有利于编程到抽象的可读性。因为抽象比实现细节更简单。您可以说，对抽象进行编程是遵循KISS原则的一种方式。

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.