我真的不明白接口存在的原因。据我所知，这是c#中不存在的多继承的一种工作(至少我是这么被告知的)。
我所看到的是，您预定义了一些成员和函数，然后必须在类中再次重新定义它们。从而使接口成为冗余。它只是感觉像句法……嗯，垃圾对我来说(请没有冒犯的意思。Junk是指无用的东西)。
在下面的例子中，我将创建一个名为Pizza的基类，而不是一个接口。
简单示例(取自不同的堆栈溢出贡献)
public interface IPizza
{
public void Order();
}
public class PepperoniPizza : IPizza
{
public void Order()
{
//Order Pepperoni pizza
}
}
public class HawaiiPizza : IPizza
{
public void Order()
{
//Order HawaiiPizza
}
}
当前回答
To me an advantage/benefit of an interface is that it is more flexible than an abstract class. Since you can only inherit 1 abstract class but you can implement multiple interfaces, changes to a system that inherits an abstract class in many places becomes problematic. If it is inherited in 100 places, a change requires changes to all 100. But, with the interface, you can place the new change in a new interface and just use that interface where its needed (Interface Seq. from SOLID). Additionally, the memory usage seems like it would be less with the interface as an object in the interface example is used just once in memory despite how many places implement the interface.
其他回答
我在这个页面上搜索了“合成”这个词，但一次也没看到。这个答案是对前面提到的答案的补充。
在面向对象项目中使用接口的一个绝对重要的原因是，它们允许你更倾向于组合而不是继承。通过实现接口，您可以将您的实现与应用于它们的各种算法解耦。
德里克·巴纳斯(Derek Banas)的“装饰图案”教程(有趣的是，它也以披萨为例)是一个有价值的插图:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j40kRwSm4VE
在这种情况下，您可以(也可能会)定义一个Pizza基类并从它们继承。然而，接口允许你做一些其他方式无法做到的事情有两个原因:
一个类可以实现多个接口。它只是定义类必须具有的特性。实现一系列接口意味着一个类可以在不同的地方实现多种功能。 接口可以定义在比类或调用方更大的范围内。这意味着您可以分离功能，分离项目依赖项，并将功能保留在一个项目或类中，并在其他地方实现该功能。
2的一个含义是，您可以更改正在使用的类，只需要它实现适当的接口。
在Python中没有鸭子类型的情况下，c#依赖接口来提供抽象。如果类的依赖项都是具体类型，则不能传入任何其他使用类型的接口，可以传入实现该接口的任何类型。
接口用于应用不同类之间的连接。例如，你有一个关于汽车和树的类;
public class Car { ... }
public class Tree { ... }
您希望为这两个类添加一个可燃功能。但是每个职业都有自己的燃烧方式。所以你只要做;
public class Car : IBurnable
{
public void Burn() { ... }
}
public class Tree : IBurnable
{
public void Burn() { ... }
}
I share your sense that Interfaces are not necessary. Here is a quote from Cwalina pg 80 Framework Design Guidelines "I often here people saying that interfaces specify contracts. I believe this a dangerous myth. Interfaces by themselves do not specify much. ..." He and co-author Abrams managed 3 releases of .Net for Microsoft. He goes on to say that the 'contract' is "expressed" in an implementation of the class. IMHO watching this for decades, there were many people warning Microsoft that taking the engineering paradigm to the max in OLE/COM might seem good but its usefulness is more directly to hardware. Especially in a big way in the 80s and 90s getting interoperating standards codified. In our TCP/IP Internet world there is little appreciation of the hardware and software gymnastics we would jump through to get solutions 'wired up' between and among mainframes, minicomputers, and microprocessors of which PCs were just a small minority. So coding to interfaces and their protocols made computing work. And interfaces ruled. But what does solving making X.25 work with your application have in common with posting recipes for the holidays? I have been coding C++ and C# for many years and I never created one once.
