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。

基于@Federico A. Ramponi的精彩回答。

想象一下你有这样的层次结构:

public interface IAnimal
{
    void DoSound();
}

public class Dog : IAnimal
{
    public void DoSound()
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Woof");
    }
}

public class Cat : IAnimal
{
    public void DoSound(IOperation o)
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Meaw");
    }
}

如果你需要在这里添加一个“Walk”方法会发生什么?这对整个设计来说是痛苦的。

同时，添加“Walk”方法会生成新的问题。那"吃"和"睡"呢?我们真的必须为我们想要添加的每个新动作或操作添加一个新方法到Animal层次结构中吗?这很难看，但最重要的是，我们永远无法关闭Animal界面。因此，使用访问者模式，我们可以在不修改层次结构的情况下向层次结构添加新方法!

因此，只需检查并运行这个c#示例:

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;

namespace VisitorPattern
{
    class Program
    {
        static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            var animals = new List<IAnimal>
            {
                new Cat(), new Cat(), new Dog(), new Cat(), 
                new Dog(), new Dog(), new Cat(), new Dog()
            };

            foreach (var animal in animals)
            {
                animal.DoOperation(new Walk());
                animal.DoOperation(new Sound());
            }

            Console.ReadLine();
        }
    }

    public interface IOperation
    {
        void PerformOperation(Dog dog);
        void PerformOperation(Cat cat);
    }

    public class Walk : IOperation
    {
        public void PerformOperation(Dog dog)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Dog walking");
        }

        public void PerformOperation(Cat cat)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Cat Walking");
        }
    }

    public class Sound : IOperation
    {
        public void PerformOperation(Dog dog)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Woof");
        }

        public void PerformOperation(Cat cat)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Meaw");
        }
    }

    public interface IAnimal
    {
        void DoOperation(IOperation o);
    }

    public class Dog : IAnimal
    {
        public void DoOperation(IOperation o)
        {
            o.PerformOperation(this);
        }
    }

    public class Cat : IAnimal
    {
        public void DoOperation(IOperation o)
        {
            o.PerformOperation(this);
        }
    }
}

Visitor设计模式非常适用于目录树、XML结构或文档概要等“递归”结构。

Visitor对象访问递归结构中的每个节点:每个目录、每个XML标记等等。Visitor对象不遍历结构。相反，Visitor方法应用于结构的每个节点。

这是一个典型的递归节点结构。可以是目录或XML标记。 [如果你是一个Java人，想象一下有很多额外的方法来构建和维护子列表。]

class TreeNode( object ):
    def __init__( self, name, *children ):
        self.name= name
        self.children= children
    def visit( self, someVisitor ):
        someVisitor.arrivedAt( self )
        someVisitor.down()
        for c in self.children:
            c.visit( someVisitor )
        someVisitor.up()

visit方法将Visitor对象应用于结构中的每个节点。在本例中，它是一个自顶向下的访问者。您可以更改visit方法的结构，以进行自底向上或其他排序。

这里有一个供访问者使用的超类。它被visit方法所使用。它“到达”结构中的每个节点。由于visit方法调用了up和down，因此访问者可以跟踪深度。

class Visitor( object ):
    def __init__( self ):
        self.depth= 0
    def down( self ):
        self.depth += 1
    def up( self ):
        self.depth -= 1
    def arrivedAt( self, aTreeNode ):
        print self.depth, aTreeNode.name

子类可以做一些事情，比如在每个级别上计算节点并积累一个节点列表，生成一个良好的路径分层节号。

这是申请表。它构建了一个树结构，someTree。它创建了一个Visitor, dumpNodes。

然后它将dumpNodes应用到树中。dumpNode对象将“访问”树中的每个节点。

someTree= TreeNode( "Top", TreeNode("c1"), TreeNode("c2"), TreeNode("c3") )
dumpNodes= Visitor()
someTree.visit( dumpNodes )

TreeNode访问算法将确保每个TreeNode都被用作Visitor的arrivedAt方法的参数。

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。

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.

在我看来，使用访问者模式或直接修改每个元素结构添加新操作的工作量大致相同。此外，如果我要添加新的元素类，比如Cow，操作接口将受到影响，并且这将传播到所有现有的元素类，因此需要重新编译所有元素类。那么重点是什么呢?