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。

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

面向接口而不是实现的代码与Java无关，也与它的接口构造无关。

这个概念是在模式/四人帮的书中突出的，但很可能在那之前就已经存在了。这个概念在Java出现之前就已经存在了。

Java Interface构造的创建就是为了帮助实现这一想法(以及其他一些事情)，人们过于关注作为意义中心的构造，而不是最初的意图。然而，这也是为什么我们在Java、c++、c#等语言中有公共和私有方法和属性的原因。

It means just interact with an object or system's public interface. Don't worry or even anticipate how it does what it does internally. Don't worry about how it is implemented. In object-oriented code, it is why we have public vs. private methods/attributes. We are intended to use the public methods because the private methods are there only for use internally, within the class. They make up the implementation of the class and can be changed as required without changing the public interface. Assume that regarding functionality, a method on a class will perform the same operation with the same expected result every time you call it with the same parameters. It allows the author to change how the class works, its implementation, without breaking how people interact with it.

And you can program to the interface, not the implementation without ever using an Interface construct. You can program to the interface not the implementation in C++, which does not have an Interface construct. You can integrate two massive enterprise systems much more robustly as long as they interact through public interfaces (contracts) rather than calling methods on objects internal to the systems. The interfaces are expected to always react the same expected way given the same input parameters; if implemented to the interface and not the implementation. The concept works in many places.

不要认为Java接口与“面向接口编程，而不是面向实现”的概念有什么关系。它们可以帮助应用概念，但它们不是概念。

编程到接口允许无缝地改变由接口定义的契约的实现。它允许契约和特定实现之间的松耦合。

IInterface classRef = new ObjectWhatever() 你可以使用任何实现IInterface的类吗?你什么时候需要这样做?

看看这个SE问题的好例子。

为什么应该首选Java类的接口?

使用接口会影响性能吗? 如果有，多少钱?

是的。它将在几秒内产生轻微的性能开销。但是如果您的应用程序需要动态地更改接口的实现，则不必担心性能影响。

如何避免这种情况而不需要维护两段代码呢?

如果您的应用程序需要多个接口实现，不要试图避免它们。在接口与某个特定实现缺乏紧密耦合的情况下，您可能必须部署补丁以将一个实现更改为另一个实现。

一个好的用例:Strategy模式的实现:

策略模式的真实例子

在Java中，这些具体类都实现了CharSequence接口:

神健壮健壮健壮健壮

除了Object之外，这些具体的类没有共同的父类，因此它们之间没有任何联系，除了它们各自都与字符数组有关，表示或操作这些字符。例如，String对象实例化后，String的字符不能被更改，而StringBuffer或StringBuilder的字符可以被编辑。

然而，这些类中的每一个都能够适当地实现CharSequence接口方法:

char charAt(int index)
int length()
CharSequence subSequence(int start, int end)
String toString()

在某些情况下，曾经接受String的Java类库类已经修改为现在接受CharSequence接口。因此，如果你有一个StringBuilder实例，而不是提取一个String对象(这意味着实例化一个新的对象实例)，它可以在实现CharSequence接口时直接传递StringBuilder本身。

某些类实现的Appendable接口对于任何可以将字符追加到底层具体类对象实例的实例的情况都具有大致相同的好处。所有这些具体类都实现了Appendable接口:

BufferedWriter, CharArrayWriter, CharBuffer, FileWriter, FilterWriter, LogStream, OutputStreamWriter, PipedWriter, PrintStream, PrintWriter, StringBuffer, StringBuilder, StringWriter, Writer

为了补充现有的帖子，当开发人员同时在不同的组件上工作时，有时对接口进行编码有助于大型项目。您所需要做的就是预先定义接口并为它们编写代码，而其他开发人员则为您正在实现的接口编写代码。