At a buffet, instead of getting to choose the dishes you want, you are handed a large tray filled with everything – sushi, pizza, hamburgers, and a weird-looking dessert. If all you wanted was a slice of pizza, you would find the whole platter a tad overwhelming, right?
Now, imagine that the overstuffed tray is chunky, oversized software that forces your code to depend on methods it does not need. This is the simple problem that the Interface Segregation Principle (ISP) solves.
The ISP is one of the five principles of designing clean and maintainable code known as the SOLID principles, coined by Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob). In simple terms, the ISP states that “no code should be forced to depend on methods that it does not use.” This is the hinge in the SOLID framework that keeps the code lean, specific, and tailored to the needs of the classes that implement it.
When the ISP is violated and classes are designed to implement interfaces bloated with irrelevant methods, the result is a tangled, fragile code – code that’s easy to break and difficult to maintain or test.
On the other hand, respecting the ISP ensures that your software remains scalable, adaptable, and modular. ISP is all about giving each class exactly what it needs: nothing less, nothing more.
To illustrate the ISP better, consider this analogy:
After a long day, you decide to unwind with Netflix. You reach for the TV remote and are shocked to find it covered with 90 buttons!
Of these, over 50 have cryptic labels like “AUX-3,” “Macro 7,” or “PIP Swap.” You can’t find the “Play” button, and now you’re wrestling with a remote that looks like it can launch a spaceship. Things get worse when you accidentally trigger the “Jazz Club” mode, filling your living room with loud saxophone music. Frustration kicks in because something simple now feels complex.
This is what happens when you violate ISP. Bloated interfaces cause the same kind of chaos.
In software design, a “fat interface” isn’t literal – it means an interface that does too much. It carries a truckload of responsibilities, expecting every class to implement every method, whether it makes sense or not. Here’s how bloated interfaces break software:
Imagine your company designed office devices:
The fat interface problem arises when the interface includes every possible function:
The budget printer is expected to support scanning, faxing, and emailing, even though it doesn’t. Developers either introduce errors or write placeholders. Updating the fax or email feature means resetting the entire fleet of machines, including those that don’t even support them.
Instead of productivity and flexibility, the system becomes frustrating, bug-prone, and inefficient.
The good news is that ISP violations are fixable. Here’s how:
First, to fix a “fat interface,” you have to recognize the problem: it’s trying to do too much at once. After identifying the issue, the next step is interface refactoring. Interface refactoring involves splitting a fat, do-too-much interface into several smaller, focused ones. Each smaller interface is built around a specific feature or responsibility. So instead of a single, large interface that tries to do everything, you now have smaller, single-purpose pieces.
To fix the ISP violation in the Multi-Function Printer (MFP) example from earlier, we can apply the interface segregation refactor. Instead of a bloated interface for the MFP, specialized interfaces can be created:
This implies that the budget printer can quietly implement just printing with no extra burden. The MFP, too, can take on multiple interfaces like faxing, scanning, and printing based on all that it is designed to support.
Of course, there’s the possibility of going overboard when segregating interfaces. The idea is not to divide your interfaces into so many pieces that managing them becomes a problem. So, how do we strike a balance?
The influence of ISP is evident even in the architectural framework of modern software. It helps software go beyond simply functioning to functioning well. ISP achieves this by keeping complexities at bay, enabling maintainable, scalable systems.
When an API is overloaded, it exposes everything instead of just what a client needs. This is where ISP plays a critical role. In both REST and GraphQL APIs, ISP promotes scalability and adaptability by keeping clients blissfully unaware of irrelevant data.
ISP encourages the creation of focused, purpose-specific interfaces that prevent clients from depending on unnecessary methods or data. For REST APIs, this translates to designing separate, streamlined endpoints, instead of one overloaded endpoint that serves unrelated resources. This keeps interactions clean and lightweight.
In GraphQL, although clients can query only what they need (which aligns with ISP), poor schema design can still violate the principle, particularly when unrelated fields are grouped into large, monolithic types.
Modern systems like React, Angular, and Vue emphasize component-based architecture, which thrives on ISP. Applying ISP in these frameworks encourages single-purpose components that are easier to test, maintain, and scale. It also prevents prop bloat, where components are passed irrelevant data. Additionally, it supports better composition, allowing small, focused pieces to be assembled into larger, more powerful UIs.
With ISP in play in modular UI components, the result is snappier UIs, cleaner logic, and happier developers.
Microservices are the architectural answer to monolithic pain. They break down systems into smaller, independent services. The application of ISP here takes the form of clearly defined service boundaries. It helps microservices form a system of systems, where each part knows its role and doesn’t attempt to do someone else’s job.
By exposing only the operations they truly own, microservices remain decoupled. Changes in one service won’t break others, as each communicates through narrow, specific interfaces.
Generally, the SOLID principles function like a well-oiled machine when followed properly. Each principle plays a specific role. Here’s how ISP compares and relates to some of the other SOLID principles:
At first glance, the ISP and the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP) seem to strike the same chord. Both emphasize focus, clarity, and doing one thing well. However, a closer look reveals that they serve distinct purposes.
SRP states that a class or module should have only one reason to change; this is about the core purpose of a class and its reason for existing. For example, if a piece of software is designed to generate reports, it shouldn’t be managing users, logging errors, or brewing coffee.
In contrast, ISP concerns what a class is made to consume. It focuses on the external structure of a system – specifically, the contracts between components. While SRP is inward-facing, defining what a class is, ISP is outward-facing, shaping how components interact. Despite this difference, both principles aim to reduce complexity and improve maintainability.
The Open-Closed Principle (OCP) states that software entities should be open for extension but closed for modification. It encourages designing systems in a way that allows new features to be added without altering existing code.
So, where does ISP come in? ISP complements OCP by promoting lean, focused interfaces. This reduces irrelevant dependencies, making it easier to extend systems without touching existing components. When a system violates ISP, it becomes rigid, making the application of OCP much harder.
Here are some best practices for applying ISP effectively:
In large codebases, there are clear signs that your software design may be drifting off course. One common indicator is the presence of numerous unused methods scattered throughout the code – suggesting that components are doing more than they should. You might also notice unusually long interface names, often containing conjunctions like “And,” which signal that the interface is trying to serve multiple responsibilities.
Another red flag is when a small change in one module unexpectedly triggers updates in unrelated modules. This points to tight coupling and suggests a breach of clean design principles, highlighting the need for better separation of concerns.
While inheritance is useful for modeling strict, hierarchical relationships, it’s often better to favor composition when designing systems with diverse functionalities. This approach works especially well in systems like microservices, user interfaces, and modular APIs, where flexibility and reuse are key.
Test-Driven Development (TDD) is a development approach where tests are written before the actual implementation code. This method naturally aligns with ISP because TDD emphasizes writing focused, purpose-driven tests. It encourages the use of small, minimal interfaces that are easier to mock, stub, and verify.
When interfaces are too large or overloaded, testing becomes cumbersome, exposing bloated dependencies and making the system harder to maintain. TDD reinforces the idea that a component should be tested based on what it should do, not everything it can do, which aligns perfectly with ISP’s goal of keeping interfaces lean and focused.
The ISP empowers developers to build software that is easier to maintain, easier to test, and more modular. By ensuring components rely only on the methods they actually use, ISP helps eliminate bloated interfaces and results in clean, efficient systems.
This level of streamlined functionality is especially relevant in modern software architectures – whether you’re designing APIs, UIs, or microservices. As long as your code follows ISP, interfaces will remain purposeful – and your codebase will thank you.
Hey there, want to help make our blog better?
Join LogRocket’s Content Advisory Board. You’ll help inform the type of content we create and get access to exclusive meetups, social accreditation, and swag.
Sign up now
Learn more →
<selectedcontent> element improves dropdowns
Learn how to implement an advanced caching layer in a Node.js app using Valkey, a high-performance, Redis-compatible in-memory datastore.
Learn how to properly handle rejected promises in TypeScript using Angular, with tips for retry logic, typed results, and avoiding unhandled exceptions.
AI’s not just following orders anymore. If you’re building the frontend, here’s how to design interfaces that actually understand your agent’s smarts.
