接口的存在不是作为类可以扩展的基础，而是作为所需函数的映射。

下面是一个不适合抽象类的接口的例子: 假设我有一个日历应用程序，它允许用户从外部源导入日历数据。我将编写类来处理导入每种类型的数据源(ical, rss, atom, json)，每个类都将实现一个公共接口，以确保它们都具有我的应用程序获取数据所需的公共方法。

<?php

interface ImportableFeed 
{
    public function getEvents();
}

Then when a user adds a new feed I can identify the type of feed it is and use the class developed for that type to import the data. Each class written to import data for a specific feed would have completely different code, there may otherwise be very few similarities between the classes outside of the fact that they are required to implement the interface that allows my application to consume them. If I were to use an abstract class, I could very easily ignore the fact that I have not overridden the getEvents() method which would then break my application in this instance whereas using an interface would not let my app run if ANY of the methods defined in the interface do not exist in the class that implemented it. My app doesn't have to care what class it uses to get data from a feed, only that the methods it needs to get that data are present.

To take this a step further, the interface proves to be extremely useful when I come back to my calendar app with the intent of adding another feed type. Using the ImportableFeed interface means I can continue adding more classes that import different feed types by simply adding new classes that implement this interface. This allows me to add tons of functionality without having to add unnecessarily bulk to my core application since my core application only relies on there being the public methods available that the interface requires so as long as my new feed import classes implement the ImportableFeed interface then I know I can just drop it in place and keep moving.

这只是一个非常简单的开始。然后，我可以创建另一个接口，所有日历类都需要实现该接口，该接口提供了更多特定于类处理的提要类型的功能。另一个很好的例子是验证提要类型的方法，等等。

This goes beyond the question but since I used the example above: Interfaces come with their own set of issues if used in this manner. I find myself needing to ensure the output that is returned from the methods implemented to match the interface and to achieve this I use an IDE that reads PHPDoc blocks and add the return type as a type hint in a PHPDoc block of the interface which will then translate to the concrete class that implements it. My classes that consume the data output from the classes that implement this interface will then at the very least know it's expecting an array returned in this example:

<?php
interface ImportableFeed 
{
    /**
     * @return array
     */
    public function getEvents();
}

没有太多空间来比较抽象类和接口。接口是简单的映射，在实现时要求类具有一组公共接口。

接口本质上是您可以创建的内容的蓝图。它们定义了类必须具有的方法，但是您可以在这些限制之外创建额外的方法。

我不确定你所说的不能向方法添加代码是什么意思——因为你可以。您是将接口应用到抽象类还是扩展它的类?

应用于抽象类的接口中的方法需要在该抽象类中实现。然而，将该接口应用于扩展类，该方法只需要在扩展类中实现。在这里我可能错了——我没有尽可能多地使用接口。

我一直认为接口是外部开发人员的一种模式，或者是确保事情正确的额外规则集。

我不了解其他语言，界面的概念是什么。但对于PHP，我将尽力解释。耐心点，如果有帮助请评论。

接口就像“契约”一样工作，指定一组子类做什么，但不指定它们如何做。

规则

An Interface can't be instantiate. You can't implement any method in an interface,i.e. it only contains .signature of the method but not details(body). Interfaces can contain methods and/or constants, but no attributes. Interface constants have the same restrictions as class constants. Interface methods are implicitly abstract. Interfaces must not declare constructors or destructors, since these are implementation details on the class level. All the methods in an interface must have public visibility.

现在让我们举个例子。 假设我们有两个玩具:一个是狗，另一个是猫。

正如我们所知，狗叫，猫叫。这两者具有相同的说话方法，但具有不同的功能或实现。 假设我们给用户一个带有说话按钮的遥控器。

当用户按下说话按钮时，玩具必须说话，无论它是狗还是猫。

这是使用接口而不是抽象类的好情况，因为实现是不同的。 为什么?还记得

如果您需要通过添加一些非抽象方法来支持子类，则应该使用抽象类。否则，接口将是您的选择。

我不记得PHP在这方面是否有所不同，但在Java中，您可以实现多个接口，但不能继承多个抽象类。我认为PHP也是这样工作的。

在PHP中，您可以通过用逗号分隔多个接口来应用它们(我认为，我不认为这是一个干净的解决方案)。

至于多个抽象类，你可以有多个相互扩展的抽象(同样，我不完全确定，但我想我以前在某个地方见过)。唯一不能扩展的是final类。

对我来说，使用接口和抽象类之间的区别更多地与代码组织有关，而不是由语言本身强制执行。在为其他开发人员准备代码时，我经常使用它们，以便它们保持在预期的设计模式内。接口是一种“契约式设计”，您的代码同意响应一组规定的API调用，这些API调用可能来自您没有访问权限的代码。

虽然从抽象类继承是一个“是一个”关系，但这并不总是你想要的，实现接口更像是一个“像一个”关系。在某些情况下，这种差异可能相当显著。

例如，假设您有一个抽象类Account，许多其他类都是从这个抽象类扩展而来的(Account的类型等等)。它有一组特定的方法，只适用于该类型组。但是，这些帐户子类中的一些实现了Versionable、Listable或Editable，以便它们可以被扔到期望使用这些api的控制器中。控制器并不关心对象的类型

相比之下，我还可以创建一个不从Account扩展的对象，比如User抽象类，仍然实现Listable和Editable，但不实现Versionable，这在这里没有意义。

通过这种方式，我说FooUser子类不是一个帐户，但确实像一个可编辑对象。同样，BarAccount从Account扩展而来，但不是User子类，而是实现了可编辑、可列表和可版本。

将所有这些可编辑的、可列表的和可版本的api添加到抽象类本身不仅是混乱和丑陋的，而且会重复Account和User中的公共接口，或者强制我的User对象实现Versionable，可能只是抛出一个异常。

接口的存在不是作为类可以扩展的基础，而是作为所需函数的映射。

下面是一个不适合抽象类的接口的例子: 假设我有一个日历应用程序，它允许用户从外部源导入日历数据。我将编写类来处理导入每种类型的数据源(ical, rss, atom, json)，每个类都将实现一个公共接口，以确保它们都具有我的应用程序获取数据所需的公共方法。

<?php

interface ImportableFeed 
{
    public function getEvents();
}

Then when a user adds a new feed I can identify the type of feed it is and use the class developed for that type to import the data. Each class written to import data for a specific feed would have completely different code, there may otherwise be very few similarities between the classes outside of the fact that they are required to implement the interface that allows my application to consume them. If I were to use an abstract class, I could very easily ignore the fact that I have not overridden the getEvents() method which would then break my application in this instance whereas using an interface would not let my app run if ANY of the methods defined in the interface do not exist in the class that implemented it. My app doesn't have to care what class it uses to get data from a feed, only that the methods it needs to get that data are present.

To take this a step further, the interface proves to be extremely useful when I come back to my calendar app with the intent of adding another feed type. Using the ImportableFeed interface means I can continue adding more classes that import different feed types by simply adding new classes that implement this interface. This allows me to add tons of functionality without having to add unnecessarily bulk to my core application since my core application only relies on there being the public methods available that the interface requires so as long as my new feed import classes implement the ImportableFeed interface then I know I can just drop it in place and keep moving.

这只是一个非常简单的开始。然后，我可以创建另一个接口，所有日历类都需要实现该接口，该接口提供了更多特定于类处理的提要类型的功能。另一个很好的例子是验证提要类型的方法，等等。

This goes beyond the question but since I used the example above: Interfaces come with their own set of issues if used in this manner. I find myself needing to ensure the output that is returned from the methods implemented to match the interface and to achieve this I use an IDE that reads PHPDoc blocks and add the return type as a type hint in a PHPDoc block of the interface which will then translate to the concrete class that implements it. My classes that consume the data output from the classes that implement this interface will then at the very least know it's expecting an array returned in this example:

<?php
interface ImportableFeed 
{
    /**
     * @return array
     */
    public function getEvents();
}

没有太多空间来比较抽象类和接口。接口是简单的映射，在实现时要求类具有一组公共接口。