在模块化设计中，软件系统被分解为相对独立的模块集合。模块可以采用多种形式，例如类，子系统或服务。在理想的世界中，每个模块都将完全独立于其他模块：开发人员可以在任何模块中工作，而无需了解任何其他模块。在这个世界上，系统的复杂性就是最糟糕的模块的复杂性。
不幸的是，这种理想是无法实现的。模块必须通过调用彼此的函数或方法来协同工作。结果，模块必须相互了解。模块之间将存在依赖关系：如果一个模块发生更改，则可能需要更改其他模块以进行匹配。例如，方法的参数在方法与调用该方法的任何代码之间创建依赖关系。如果必需的参数更改，则必须修改该方法的所有调用以符合新的签名。依赖关系可以采用许多其他形式，并且它们可能非常微妙。模块化设计的目标是最大程度地减少模块之间的依赖性。
为了管理依赖关系，我们将每个模块分为两个部分：接口和实现。接口包含使用其他模块的开发人员必须知道的所有内容，才能使用给定的模块。通常，接口描述模块做什么，而不描述模块如何做。该实现由执行接口所承诺的代码组成。在特定模块中工作的开发人员必须了解该模块的接口和实现，以及由给定模块调用的任何其他模块的接口。除了正在使用的模块以外，开发人员无需了解其他模块的实现。
考虑一个实现平衡树的模块。该模块可能包含复杂的代码，以确保树保持平衡。但是，此复杂性对于模块用户而言是不可见的。用户可以看到一个相对简单的接口，用于调用在树中插入，删除和获取节点的操作。要调用插入操作，调用者只需提供新节点的键和值即可。遍历树和拆分节点的机制在接口中不可见。
就本书而言，模块是具有接口和实现的任何代码单元。面向对象编程语言中的每个类都是一个模块。类中的方法或非面向对象语言中的函数也可以视为模块：每个模块都有一个接口和一个实现，并且可以将模块化设计技术应用于它们。更高级别的子系统和服务也是模块。它们的接口可能采用不同的形式，例如内核调用或 HTTP 请求。本书中有关模块化设计的许多讨论都集中在设计类上，但是技术和概念也适用于其他种类的模块。
最好的模块是那些其接口比其实现简单得多的模块。这样的模块具有两个优点。首先，一个简单的接口可以将模块强加于系统其余部分的复杂性降至最低。其次，如果以不更改其接口的方式修改了一个模块，则该修改不会影响其他模块。如果模块的接口比其实现简单得多，则可以在不影响其他模块的情况下更改模块的许多方面。
In modular design, a software system is decomposed into a collection of modules that are relatively independent. Modules can take many forms, such as classes, subsystems, or services. In an ideal world, each module would be completely independent of the others: a developer could work in any of the modules without knowing anything about any of the other modules. In this world, the complexity of a system would be the complexity of its worst module.
Unfortunately, this ideal is not achievable. Modules must work together by calling each others’s functions or methods. As a result, modules must know something about each other. There will be dependencies between the modules: if one module changes, other modules may need to change to match. For example, the arguments for a method create a dependency between the method and any code that invokes the method. If the required arguments change, all invocations of the method must be modified to conform to the new signature. Dependencies can take many other forms, and they can be quite subtle. The goal of modular design is to minimize the dependencies between modules.
In order to manage dependencies, we think of each module in two parts: an interface and an implementation. The interface consists of everything that a developer working in a different module must know in order to use the given module. Typically, the interface describes what the module does but not how it does it. The implementation consists of the code that carries out the promises made by the interface. A developer working in a particular module must understand the interface and implementation of that module, plus the interfaces of any other modules invoked by the given module. A developer should not need to understand the implementations of modules other than the one he or she is working in.
Consider a module that implements balanced trees. The module probably contains sophisticated code for ensuring that the tree remains balanced. However, this complexity is not visible to users of the module. Users see a relatively simple interface for invoking operations to insert, remove, and fetch nodes in the tree. To invoke an insert operation, the caller need only provide the key and value for the new node; the mechanisms for traversing the tree and splitting nodes are not visible in the interface.
For the purposes of this book, a module is any unit of code that has an interface and an implementation. Each class in an object-oriented programming language is a module. Methods within a class, or functions in a language that isn’t object-oriented, can also be thought of as modules: each of these has an interface and an implementation, and modular design techniques can be applied to them. Higher-level subsystems and services are also modules; their interfaces may take different forms, such as kernel calls or HTTP requests. Much of the discussion about modular design in this book focuses on designing classes, but the techniques and concepts apply to other kinds of modules as well.
The best modules are those whose interfaces are much simpler than their implementations. Such modules have two advantages. First, a simple interface minimizes the complexity that a module imposes on the rest of the system. Second, if a module is modified in a way that does not change its interface, then no other module will be affected by the modification. If a module’s interface is much simpler than its implementation, there will be many aspects of the module that can be changed without affecting other modules.