Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Is it better to pass an *interface* or an *object* as a parameter to a function?

I'm trying to convince a colleague that a function should take an interface as a parameter, and not the object itself. I think small objects can be fine to pass across, but for large ones I would give them an interface and just pass the i/f over, not the whole thing.

Note that there will only ever be one of these large classes - the i/f will never be used for a different object. This is merely for hiding the implementation of an object.

Would you agree that separating a large class into an interface(s) is good practice?
Are there any disadvantages to doing this?

Example:

public interface class IVeryLargeClass
{
    void DoSomething();
    ...
};

public ref class VeryLargeClass : public IVeryLargeClass
{
public:
    virtual void DoSomething() { ... }
    ...
};

public ref class AnotherClass
{
public:
    AnotherClass(VeryLargeClass^ vlc)  { vlc->DoSomething(); }
 // OR
    AnotherClass(IVeryLargeClass^ vlc) { vlc->DoSomething(); }
};
like image 782
demoncodemonkey Avatar asked Jun 16 '09 18:06

demoncodemonkey


People also ask

Can we pass an interface in an object parameter?

Yes, you can pass Interface as a parameter in the function.

Can we pass interface as a parameter to a method in TypeScript?

An interface type cannot be passed as a parameter. When running TypeScript code, you are really compiling it down to JavaScript and then running the JavaScript. An interface is a TypeScript compile-time construct, so at runtime, there is no such thing as an interface type to call functions on or inspect properties of.

Can we pass interface as a parameter to a method in C#?

Interfaces can be only compile-time types because there one cannot create an object of interface type. Nevertheless, interface reference can represent an real object, only the run-time type of this object can be some structure or class implementing the interface. There is no such thing as "interface to a method".


2 Answers

One of the first principles you learn in OO development:

Program to an interface, not an implementation.

You indicate that "there will only ever be one of these large classes - the i/f will never be used for a different object". This might be true in your case, but I wish I had a nickel for every time such a statement turned out to be wrong.

In addition to considering whether there might be multiple implementations of your interface, you should also consider whether your concrete object exports (or might export) additional methods that do not share a logical affinity with the operations declared in the interface. In such a case, you could simply declare the additional operations in one or more additional interfaces. A client, then, need only couple with the interface that exports the operations in which it is interested.

Put simply, interfaces provide a means of managing the coupling between clients and providers.

like image 125
Brandon E Taylor Avatar answered Oct 20 '22 16:10

Brandon E Taylor


The Dependency Inversion Principle can be summed up as: It is better to depend on abstractions than concretions.

It's almost always better to pass an interface than it is to pass a concrete class.

That said, high cohesiveness against internal types is ok within a particular module, but that's very subjective as to when and how you should pass concrete objects.

like image 29
Randolpho Avatar answered Oct 20 '22 15:10

Randolpho