我真的很喜欢http://python-3-patterns-idioms-test.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Visitor.html上的描述和例子。

The assumption is that you have a primary class hierarchy that is fixed; perhaps it’s from another vendor and you can’t make changes to that hierarchy. However, your intent is that you’d like to add new polymorphic methods to that hierarchy, which means that normally you’d have to add something to the base class interface. So the dilemma is that you need to add methods to the base class, but you can’t touch the base class. How do you get around this? The design pattern that solves this kind of problem is called a “visitor” (the final one in the Design Patterns book), and it builds on the double dispatching scheme shown in the last section. The visitor pattern allows you to extend the interface of the primary type by creating a separate class hierarchy of type Visitor to virtualize the operations performed upon the primary type. The objects of the primary type simply “accept” the visitor, then call the visitor’s dynamically-bound member function.

Cay Horstmann在他的OO设计和模式书中有一个很好的例子，说明了在哪里应用Visitor。他总结了这个问题:

复合对象通常具有复杂的结构，由单个元素组成。有些元素可能也有子元素. ...元素上的操作访问它的子元素，对它们应用该操作，并将结果组合在一起. ...然而，向这样的设计中添加新的操作并不容易。

不容易的原因是，操作是在结构类本身中添加的。例如，假设你有一个文件系统:

下面是一些我们可能想用这个结构实现的操作(功能):

显示节点元素的名称(一个文件列表) 显示计算出的节点元素大小(其中目录的大小包括其所有子元素的大小) 等。

You could add functions to each class in the FileSystem to implement the operations (and people have done this in the past as it's very obvious how to do it). The problem is that whenever you add a new functionality (the "etc." line above), you might need to add more and more methods to the structure classes. At some point, after some number of operations you've added to your software, the methods in those classes don't make sense anymore in terms of the classes' functional cohesion. For example, you have a FileNode that has a method calculateFileColorForFunctionABC() in order to implement the latest visualization functionality on the file system.

The Visitor Pattern (like many design patterns) was born from the pain and suffering of developers who knew there was a better way to allow their code to change without requiring a lot of changes everywhere and also respecting good design principles (high cohesion, low coupling). It's my opinion that it's hard to understand the usefulness of a lot of patterns until you've felt that pain. Explaining the pain (like we attempt to do above with the "etc." functionalities that get added) takes up space in the explanation and is a distraction. Understanding patterns is hard for this reason.

Visitor allows us to decouple the functionalities on the data structure (e.g., FileSystemNodes) from the data structures themselves. The pattern allows the design to respect cohesion -- data structure classes are simpler (they have fewer methods) and also the functionalities are encapsulated into Visitor implementations. This is done via double-dispatching (which is the complicated part of the pattern): using accept() methods in the structure classes and visitX() methods in the Visitor (the functionality) classes:

这个结构允许我们添加新的功能，这些功能作为具体的访问者在结构上工作(不需要改变结构类)。

例如，PrintNameVisitor实现目录列表功能，PrintSizeVisitor实现具有大小的版本。我们可以想象有一天有一个以XML生成数据的“ExportXMLVisitor”，或者另一个以JSON生成数据的访问者，等等。我们甚至可以让一个访问者使用图形化语言(如DOT)显示我的目录树，然后用另一个程序进行可视化。

最后要注意的是:Visitor的双重分派的复杂性意味着它更难以理解、编码和调试。简而言之，它有很高的极客因素，违背了KISS原则。在研究人员进行的一项调查中，访问者被证明是一个有争议的模式(关于它的有用性没有达成共识)。一些实验甚至表明，它并没有使代码更容易维护。

使用访问者模式至少有三个很好的理由:

减少代码的增殖，当数据结构发生变化时，代码只会略有不同。 将相同的计算应用于多个数据结构，而不改变实现计算的代码。 在不更改遗留代码的情况下向遗留库添加信息。

请看看我写的一篇关于这方面的文章。

感谢@Federico A. Ramponi的精彩解释，我只是在java版本中做了这个。希望对大家有所帮助。

正如@Konrad Rudolph指出的那样，这实际上是使用两个具体实例一起确定运行时方法的双重分派。

因此，实际上，只要正确定义了操作接口，就不需要为操作执行器创建公共接口。

import static java.lang.System.out;
public class Visitor_2 {
    public static void main(String...args) {
        Hearen hearen = new Hearen();
        FoodImpl food = new FoodImpl();
        hearen.showTheHobby(food);
        Katherine katherine = new Katherine();
        katherine.presentHobby(food);
    }
}

interface Hobby {
    void insert(Hearen hearen);
    void embed(Katherine katherine);
}


class Hearen {
    String name = "Hearen";
    void showTheHobby(Hobby hobby) {
        hobby.insert(this);
    }
}

class Katherine {
    String name = "Katherine";
    void presentHobby(Hobby hobby) {
        hobby.embed(this);
    }
}

class FoodImpl implements Hobby {
    public void insert(Hearen hearen) {
        out.println(hearen.name + " start to eat bread");
    }
    public void embed(Katherine katherine) {
        out.println(katherine.name + " start to eat mango");
    }
}

正如您所期望的那样，公共接口将为我们带来更多的清晰度，尽管它实际上并不是这个模式的基本部分。

import static java.lang.System.out;
public class Visitor_2 {
    public static void main(String...args) {
        Hearen hearen = new Hearen();
        FoodImpl food = new FoodImpl();
        hearen.showHobby(food);
        Katherine katherine = new Katherine();
        katherine.showHobby(food);
    }
}

interface Hobby {
    void insert(Hearen hearen);
    void insert(Katherine katherine);
}

abstract class Person {
    String name;
    protected Person(String n) {
        this.name = n;
    }
    abstract void showHobby(Hobby hobby);
}

class Hearen extends  Person {
    public Hearen() {
        super("Hearen");
    }
    @Override
    void showHobby(Hobby hobby) {
        hobby.insert(this);
    }
}

class Katherine extends Person {
    public Katherine() {
        super("Katherine");
    }

    @Override
    void showHobby(Hobby hobby) {
        hobby.insert(this);
    }
}

class FoodImpl implements Hobby {
    public void insert(Hearen hearen) {
        out.println(hearen.name + " start to eat bread");
    }
    public void insert(Katherine katherine) {
        out.println(katherine.name + " start to eat mango");
    }
}

我不理解这种模式，直到我看到bob叔叔的文章和评论。 考虑下面的代码:

public class Employee
{
}

public class SalariedEmployee : Employee
{
}

public class HourlyEmployee : Employee
{
}

public class QtdHoursAndPayReport
{
    public void PrintReport()
    {
        var employees = new List<Employee>
        {
            new SalariedEmployee(),
            new HourlyEmployee()
        };
        foreach (Employee e in employees)
        {
            if (e is HourlyEmployee he)
                PrintReportLine(he);
            if (e is SalariedEmployee se)
                PrintReportLine(se);
        }
    }

    public void PrintReportLine(HourlyEmployee he)
    {
        System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("hours");
    }
    public void PrintReportLine(SalariedEmployee se)
    {
        System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("fix");
    }
}

class Program
{
    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        new QtdHoursAndPayReport().PrintReport();
    }
}

虽然它看起来很好，因为它确认了单一责任，但它违反了开放/封闭原则。每次你有新的员工类型，你将不得不添加如果与类型检查。如果你不知道，在编译时你永远也不会知道。

使用访问者模式，你可以让你的代码更干净，因为它不违反开放/关闭原则，也不违反单一责任。如果你忘记实现visit，它将不会编译:

public abstract class Employee
{
    public abstract void Accept(EmployeeVisitor v);
}

public class SalariedEmployee : Employee
{
    public override void Accept(EmployeeVisitor v)
    {
        v.Visit(this);
    }
}

public class HourlyEmployee:Employee
{
    public override void Accept(EmployeeVisitor v)
    {
        v.Visit(this);
    }
}

public interface EmployeeVisitor
{
    void Visit(HourlyEmployee he);
    void Visit(SalariedEmployee se);
}

public class QtdHoursAndPayReport : EmployeeVisitor
{
    public void Visit(HourlyEmployee he)
    {
        System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("hourly");
        // generate the line of the report.
    }
    public void Visit(SalariedEmployee se)
    {
        System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("fix");
    } // do nothing

    public void PrintReport()
    {
        var employees = new List<Employee>
        {
            new SalariedEmployee(),
            new HourlyEmployee()
        };
        QtdHoursAndPayReport v = new QtdHoursAndPayReport();
        foreach (var emp in employees)
        {
            emp.Accept(v);
        }
    }
}

class Program
{

    public static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        new QtdHoursAndPayReport().PrintReport();
    }       
}  
}

神奇的是，虽然v.Visit(this)看起来一样，但实际上是不同的，因为它调用不同的访问者重载。

我真的很喜欢http://python-3-patterns-idioms-test.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Visitor.html上的描述和例子。

The assumption is that you have a primary class hierarchy that is fixed; perhaps it’s from another vendor and you can’t make changes to that hierarchy. However, your intent is that you’d like to add new polymorphic methods to that hierarchy, which means that normally you’d have to add something to the base class interface. So the dilemma is that you need to add methods to the base class, but you can’t touch the base class. How do you get around this? The design pattern that solves this kind of problem is called a “visitor” (the final one in the Design Patterns book), and it builds on the double dispatching scheme shown in the last section. The visitor pattern allows you to extend the interface of the primary type by creating a separate class hierarchy of type Visitor to virtualize the operations performed upon the primary type. The objects of the primary type simply “accept” the visitor, then call the visitor’s dynamically-bound member function.