Possible Duplicate:
Interface vs Base class
I am not understanding the difference between an abstract class and an interface. When do I need to use which art of type?
- 6Look to this question: Interface vs Base classMichael Pakhantsov– Michael Pakhantsov2010-09-03 12:17:53 +00:00Commented Sep 3, 2010 at 12:17
- 1why do people upvote this type of question?fearofawhackplanet– fearofawhackplanet2010-09-03 12:18:54 +00:00Commented Sep 3, 2010 at 12:18
- 1@fear: and why do people answer it? It should be obvious that this is a duplicate.John Saunders– John Saunders2010-09-03 12:26:34 +00:00Commented Sep 3, 2010 at 12:26
- 1They answer because they can get a few upvotes or because it is easier than finding the duplicate (for which there is no incentive). They upvote because they don't know about the duplicate or ... actually I don't really know.dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten– dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten2010-09-03 17:35:52 +00:00Commented Sep 3, 2010 at 17:35
Add a comment |
3 Answers
Try thinking of it like this:
An abstract class creates an "is-a" relationship. Volkswagon is a Car.
An interface creates a "can-do" relationship. Fred can IDrive.
Moreover, Fred can IDrive, but Fred is a Person.
Comments
When we create an interface, we are basically creating a set of methods without any implementation that must be overridden by the implemented classes. The advantage is that it provides a way for a class to be a part of two classes: one from inheritance hierarchy and one from the interface.
When we create an abstract class, we are creating a base class that might have one or more completed methods but at least one or more methods are left uncompleted and declared abstract. If all the methods of an abstract class are uncompleted then it is same as an interface. The purpose of an abstract class is to provide a base class definition for how a set of derived classes will work and then allow the programmers to fill the implementation in the derived classes.
article along with the demo project discussed Interfaces versus Abstract classes.
1 Comment
Cody
"If all the methods of an abstract class are uncompleted then it is same as an interface." Should be written as "If all the methods of an abstract class are uncompleted AND ABSTRACT then it is same as an interface.". Right?
An abstract class is class probably with some abstract methods and some non-abstract methods. They do stuff (have associated code). If a new non-abstract class, subclasses the abstract class it must implement the abstract methods.
I.E.
public abstract class A { public string sayHi() { return "hi"; } // a method with code in it public abstract string sayHello(); // no implementation } public class B : A { // must implement, since it is not abstract public override string sayHello() { return "Hello from B"; } } Interface is more like a protocol. A list of methods that a class implementing that interface must have. But they don't do anything. They have just method prototypes.
public interface A { string sayHi(); // no implementation (code) allowed string sayHello(); // no implementation (code) allowed } public class B : A { // must implement both methods string sayHi() { return "hi"; } string sayHello() { return "hello"; } } Both are often confused because there is no protocol/interface in C++. So the way to simulate an interface behavior in that language is writing a pure virtual class (a class with only pure virtual functions).
class A { virtual int a() = 0; // pure virtual function (no implementation) } 