在我们的一个项目中，有很多代码看起来像这样:
internal static class Extensions
{
public static string AddFoo(this string s)
{
if (s == null)
{
return "Foo";
}
return $({s}Foo);
}
}
除了“以后更容易将类型公开”之外，还有其他明确的原因吗?
我怀疑它只在非常奇怪的边缘情况下(在Silverlight反射)或根本不重要。
当前回答
出于与在任何其他类中使用公共方法相同的原因——因此它们对包含类型外部是公共的。
类型的访问修饰符与其成员的访问修饰符完全没有关系。这两个决定是完全独立的。
仅仅因为类型和成员的修饰符的某些组合产生了看似相同的结果(或者其他人称之为“有效”)并不意味着它们在语义上是相同的。
实体的本地访问修饰符(在代码中声明)和它的全局有效访问级别(通过包含链评估)也是完全不同的东西。一间上了锁的大楼里的开放式办公室仍然是开放的，即使你不能从街上真正进入它。
不要考虑最终结果。首先，想想你在当地需要什么。
公众的公众:经典的情况。 Public的Internal:类型是Public，但是你想在程序集中获得一些半合法的访问权限来做一些古怪的事情。 内部的公共:你隐藏了整个类型，但在程序集中它有一个经典的公共表面 内部的内部:我想不出任何现实世界的例子。也许很快就会成为公众的内部信息?
内部的公众vs内部的内部是一个虚假的困境。这两个词的意思完全不同，应该在各自的情况下使用，不能重叠。
其他回答
它是一样的，public方法将被标记为内部的，因为它在内部类中，但它有一个优点(正如你所说)，如果你想将类标记为公共的，你必须修改更少的代码。
I think I have an additional opinion on this. At first, I was wondering about how it makes sense to declare something to public in an internal class. Then I have ended up here, reading that it could be good if you later decide to change the class to public. True. So, a pattern formed in my mind: If it does not change the current behavior, then be permissive, and allow things that does not makes sense (and does not hurt) in the current state of code, but later it would, if you change the declaration of the class.
是这样的:
public sealed class MyCurrentlySealedClass
{
protected void MyCurretlyPrivateMethod()
{
}
}
According to the "pattern" I have mentioned above, this should be perfectly fine. It follows the same idea. It behaves as a private method, since you can not inherit the class. But if you delete the sealed constraint, it is still valid: the inherited classes can see this method, which is absolutely what I wanted to achieve. But you get a warning: CS0628, or CA1047. Both of them is about do not declare protected members in a sealed class. Moreover, I have found full agreement, about that it is senseless: 'Protected member in sealed class' warning (a singleton class)
因此，在这个警告和相关的讨论之后，我决定在一个内部类中使所有内容都变得内部或更少，因为它更符合那种思维方式，而且我们不会混合不同的“模式”。
Internal表示只能从同一程序集中访问成员。该程序集中的其他类可以访问内部公共成员，但不能访问私有成员或受保护成员(无论是否是内部成员)。
我怀疑“以后公开类型会更容易吗?”
作用域规则意味着该方法只能作为内部方法可见——因此将方法标记为公共方法还是内部方法并不重要。
我想到的一种可能是，类是公共的，后来改为内部的，开发人员没有费心去更改所有的方法可访问性修饰符。
I often mark my methods in internal classes public instead of internal as a) it doesn't really matter and b) I use internal to indicate that the method is internal on purpose (there is some reason why I don't want to expose this method in a public class. Therefore, if I have an internal method I really have to understand the reason why it's internal before changing it to public whereas if I am dealing with a public method in an internal class I really have to think about why the class is internal as opposed to why each method is internal.
