I'm a windows developer and I need to use Code::Blocks
to develope multiplataform C++ GUI applications.
After installing Code::Blocks and wxWidgets in my first try to do a simple "Hello World" application, the IDE show me a box with $(#wx)
What is the $(#wx) ?
Googling for tutorials I see this
What is the -g ?
Finally the following error message appear:
For 3 days I'm trying over and over again without success !
I even try wxPack. Nothing works !
With VC++, C++Builder and even wxDev-C++ this is straightforward
Only Code::Blocks is so difficult !
Googling, I find many people with the same error, but the advices they get didn't work for me !
Can someone tell me step by step what I must do?
Thank you.
Your frustration comes, as usually does, from your ignorance. If your are required to learn about C::B, well, that's life. Don't waste time on getting so angry, life is short.
CodeBlocks are not tied to a compiler. You can use VC++, MinGW, TDM-GCC, GCC, etc. Thus, you must tell C::B the compiler to use. You may use different compilers for different "targets" (see below).
C::B is not tied to any library either. If you want to use wxWidgets you must tell C::B about the needed files and where to find them.
It's very common that people who use C::B use MinGW as the compiler. That's why when you first install C::B it searches for MinGW and, if found, set it as the default compiler. You can set your own preference in Settings->Compiler. Same goes for the debugger, usually GDB.
As a side note, be aware that MinGW is ONLY 32 bits. There's a different compiler (MinGW 64). TDM-GCC offers both compilers (and their GDB versions) at once, I recommend installing 32/64 versions in different folders and setting them in C::B as different compilers. For Linux, the "mother" GCC is the de-facto standard.
When you build your app you must define a target. This is nothing else but a way of telling things like "I want a 32 bit library" or "I want a 64 executable". In your required project you may set several targets. Select the desired one before compiling (combobox in the main tool bar).
While developing it's very advisable to set a target as a "debug". This means you want to use the debugger. This requires to use "debug symbols". With GCC (or one of its "children", MinGW...) you acomplish it but adding -g as a flag to the compiler.
Now you understand that probably you set not only one, but several targets like "release 64 exe", "debug 32 exe" etc. Right?
wxWidgets joins in scene
Despite C::B is made with wxWidgets, it doesn't ship with it. Download the version you like from wxWidgets site. While some binaries are offered, if you use some other compiler or some other parameters then you need to compile wxWidgets on your own. See the docs/msw/install.txt and learn about the different configurations (release, debug, static/dynamic lib, etc). Your "target" must match the wxWidgets configuration, so better build several versions, same as your targets. And don't forget to use the same parameters for your app target as you used to each wxWidgets target. You can do this at Project->Build options.
As with any compiler you must tell where to find the libraries and the headers. And the libraries you want to use. The Windows libraries (kernel32, user32, etc, they are a lot, ask in another thread) and the wxWidgets libraries.
When you update your app perhaps you use a newer wxWidgets version, but also want to support an older version with other wxWidgets version. You have several folders. For your project you should update all directories. Can this be done shortly? Yes. in C::B you can define variables(e.g. $wx31dir) and use them like $(wx31dir)/include. Redefining the var saves you a lot of typing.
You can use a global var $(#wx31dir) or several, project fitted vars. Your decision.
Finally, C::B offers a project template for a wxWidgets app. It will ask you some locations (wx dirs) and vars. If you don't understand well what it does, better don't use it and set everything on your own. First time is hard, I know. Go ahead and you'll get it if you pay attention to needed steps.
Have you read the CodeBlocks manual?
Since you having hard time using C::B, I suggest you switch to CodeLite which I find simpler to start with than C::B (My experience). Everything you need is documented on CodeLite Wiki. Creating project is well documented with screenshots but before you compile, open environment variables (Settings->Environment Variables) and add line WXWIN=/path/to/your/wxwidgets/installation and compile as it is explained there.
Ouch....
You do not need to interact with code::blocks at all to use wxwidgets.
You can simple download wx header and binary package (depends of your compiler), place it on directory and import (with #include) it in your source code.
I do not see what is relevant to C::B? You can use any library without compiling and setting any variable in your editor (IDE) - but then you lack of lot of feuters.
I hope that
Using wxWidgets Pre Built Binary in CodeBlocks at wxWidgets wiki
and
Using wxWidgets (MSW) 3.0 Binary with Code::Blocks Scripted Wizard
would be best and useful answer for your question.
Even I want to use wheel for my convenience every day, but I don't want to invent the wheel every day again and again.
Even that your question is about wxWidgets and Code::Blocks for MS Windows, and that the answer links are of the wxWidgets and Code::Blocks own,
For recommended stability, I include the full screenshot of this document of wxWidgets own wiki
and
this of Code::Blocks own wiki
Related
SO!
Let's say I have a number of settings (GCC compiler 9.3.0 built from source, as the distribution I have to use has a very old one, along with environment setup) for a new Kit in QtCreator.
I have managed to setup an environment for compilation and execution of compiled binaries, and made a script to make it work (like qmake -nocache -recursive/make/sudo make install, direct execution of g++, and other stuff).
One thing that script can't do at the moment, is that it cannot create a kit for QtCreator with new compilers and environment being set as required, so after running a script, its user has to go through setting it up himself through GUI, which is bad, because this can cause misconfiguration.
This thing I'm trying to create is going to be used by around ~200 people in my company, so leaving readme.txt with instructions just doesn't go well enough for me - I don't want running around fixing missing "{" and "}" in Environment description in created Kits, and other stuff.
Are there ways to create Kits for QtCreator automatically from command line? Maybe, there's some files to edit?
I've looked into this one a few years back (I wanted to do something similar for registering Buildroot toolchains automatically in QtCreator), and I was unable to find an off the shelf solution. So i think there are 2 ways to implement this:
a) Implementing a command line utility the manipulate the ~/.config/QtProject/qtcreator/{toolchains,profiles}.xml files. Maybe by (re)using the existing C++ implementation within QtCreator, or just re-implement it ie. in Python. Back than I didn't start to work on this as there was no real business need.
b) Switching to qbs, as qbs has support for setting up toolchains from the command line ( see: https://doc.qt.io/qbs/cli-setup-toolchains.html)
If you decide to go with solution a), please let me know and maybe we can partner up to implement it.
Check out the command line sdktool bundled with QtCreator:
The SDK tool can be used to set up Qt versions, tool chains, devices
and kits in Qt Creator.
There still is a lot of knowledge about Qt Creator internals required
to use this tool!
I haven't tried it yet, but I did find the executable under Tools/QtCreator/libexec/qtcreator subdirectory of the Qt Creator installation directory. ./sdktool --help works for me under Linux.
I'm trying to use LLVM to implement a compiler for a toy language. Something like the Kaleidoscope Tutorial. I'm using Visual Studio on 64 bit Windows.
I've managed to build LLVM and clang using VS, but now I want to use the LLVM libraries in my own project. It seems like a silly question but how to I do this? What compiler options do I need? What libraries should I link with etc. etc.
As far as I can see this isn't covered anywhere in the LLVM documentation although I could have easily missed it.
I discovered llvm-config which is designed to solve the problems I'm having. It often seems to give incorrect information (for instance llvm-config --includedir is wrong) but it at least gives me a list of libraries to link with.
I suppose I could also use CMake to generate project files, but CMake seems to be difficult to learn from free resources.
From some Googling around it seems that clang's support for windows has been improving recently and boost's support for clang may also have improved. But I'm fairly new to all this heavy-lifting compiler configuration stuff and new to boost, so I'm not sure what the current status really is.
I'm trying to run the command:
b2 --build-dir=build toolset=clang --build-type=complete stage
as suggested in section 5.2.4 in www.boost.org/.../getting_started/windows.
This does work to some extent, but watching the logs being printed to screen I see a few worrying things:
statements starting clang-linux.compile.c++.... even though I am on windows.
12 warnings generated. (or similar) perhaps always these are -Wunused-local-typedef, but I'm not sure.
2 warnings and 8 errors generated (or similar) surely if there are errors the build has failed? How am I supposed to know which component of boost has not built properly and what can I do to fix this?
I'm not clear whether I need MSVC the compiler, Visual Stufio the IDE, and/or MinGW and whether I need to manually set flags to pass to the compiler? Perhaps clang+boost is not ready for windows yet?
Ultimately I want to use boost.python, and at a later date maybe boost.coroutine.
Presumably if I want to use clang for my own projects I need to compile boost with clang too?
bootstrap --with-toolset=clang-win
b2 toolset=clang-win
Make sure that clang.exe is on your PATH.
I understand it is somehow making a connection so that a compiler when envokes connects a source code to whatever libraries that it needs to.
But what is going on a more technical level, or better put what do I need to know in order to confidentally compile code.
I'm working with C++ and MinGW, and have started to look into build files and stuff for Sublime Text 2 (Have learned mostly under unix, or Java + eclipse so far). But what I don't understand what is adding a compiler to your path do for you?
Do I need to add it for every folder I want to compile from? Or is it system wide? I'm really learning this stuff for the first time, we we're never showed how to set up development environments or even deploy code on other systems.
You probably mean include paths and library paths in the compiler:
include paths: where the compiler will look for headers; and
library paths: where the linker, invoked by the compiler, will look for binary libraries to finish building your project.
If that is the case, look here for a gentle explanation.
Basically, what is happening is that the compiler looks in certain places for symbols defined by the operating system and other libraries installed system-wide.
In addition to those paths, you need to tell the compiler where to find the symbols defined in your own project.
You may also mean something related to installing the compiler itself or configuring the editor to use it.
In that case, what is happening is that you need to tell the build system where to find the executable for the compiler.
Basically, what is probably happening is that your editor wants to know where the compiler is so that it can provide real time feedback on your code. Adding the compiler to the system path will usually, but not always, solve your problem.
In more detail:
A C++ build is a rather complex tool chain, involving determining dependencies, preprocessing, compiling, and linking. There are tools that automate that tool chain, and those tools are in turn wrapped into the functionality of modern IDEs like Eclipse, Visual C++, or Sublime Text 2. You many need to tell your editor where to find the tools it uses to provide you with those services.
I can't stand XCode, but really love OpenFrameworks, and I know it works on Linux+Win32 so I don't see why it should be XCode dependent. If I need to have XCode installed that's fine, I just don't want to use it at all.
Xcode internally uses gcc/llvm. in fact from the command line you can cd into a directory that contains an openFrameworks project and just type xcodebuild. but this won't allow you to edit the project file and add new source code, etc.
the Linux makefiles could be adapted to work on OSX as well. they already contain a lot of the information necessary about finding the correct source files, library paths etc. however Linux allows us to install many more components as shared system libraries, while on OSX we link most of the libs statically, so a number of extra library paths would need to be added. probably the biggest gotcha is that everything has to be compiled 32 bit, which means passing -arch i386 everywhere, so you can't just install dependant libs using Homebrew or MacPorts. we are in the process of transitioning to 64 bit but there are still some QuickTime calls that require us to stick with 32 bit, mainly around accessing legacy video capture devices that a lot of us still use for computer vision.
like #cdelacroix points out, we only maintain Xcode project files on OSX. this is mainly due to the lack of a decent alternative. there is a version of Code::Blocks for OSX but it is not very well supported, has some issues with native gui rendering and tends to lag behind the other platforms. Xcode is also the easiest way to install a toolchain on OSX so for most users installing Xcode is necessary.
if you do get a makefile based build system working, and would be interested in maintaining it medium to long term, please consider contributing it to the GitHub repository, it would be gladly accepted.
As of March 2013, openFrameworks has official makefile support for compiling the library itself. However, at the time of this writing, the changes haven't yet been merged into the stable release. You'll need to clone the Git repository and switch to the development branch.
git clone https://github.com/openframeworks/openFrameworks
cd openFrameworks && git checkout develop
cd libs/openFrameworksCompiled/project
make
As far as I can tell, we still need to use the unofficial solutions for compiling apps against the library.
You need Xcode, or at least a set of compilers (more information is available here), but otherwise, no, you can edit/work with the code in whatever editor or environment you want.
Here's a link to a makefile which will compile an OpenFrameworks application on OsX:
https://gist.github.com/labe-me/1190981
Place the makefile in the apps' directory and run make. Tested on OsX 10.6, but haven't tried with addons yet.
As #mipadi said, there is no requirement to actually use Xcode, you can do pretty much everything you do in Xcode with make or cake or any of your build system of choice. All you have to do is find the right set of command line options to pass to the usual tools (compiler, linker, strip, etc.), and sometimes the easier way is to... look in the Xcode build window how it is doing stuff (expand the lines with the small button on the right of each line).
For example you can link with your framework of choice with ld -framework Framework -FPathToFramework foo.o or your dynamic library with ld -lLib -LPathToDylib foo.o. You might have to learn about #rpath, #loader_path and install_name_tool to ship a self-contained packaged application.
As for OpenFrameworks, the "requirement" for Xcode is that the authors decided to maintain only Xcode project files. I just looked at how they do it, they ship source code and Xcode project files that build static libraries, so it will be even more simple for you (although you will need to link the library dependencies by hand). You will have to choose between compiling everything from source in your build system (if you want more customization power without touching Xcode), or just produce the 2 static libraries (openFrameworks.a and openFrameworksDebug.a) with Xcode once, then use them in your build system (recommended until you really need continuous customization).