I have an embedded device with WinCE 6.0 as OS. The manufacturer provides an IDE for 3rd party development to it. The IDE pretty much allows nothing else than
.NET 3.5 Compact Framework scripting that's invoked from various events from the main application
Adding files to the device.
The included mediaplayer seems to be using DirectShow and the OS has media codec only for mpeg-1 encoded video playback. My goal is to to be able to play media encoded with some other codecs as well inside that main application.
I've already managed to use DirectShowNETCF (DirectShow wrapper for .NET Compact Framework) and successfully playback mpeg-1 encoded video.
I'm totally new with this stuff and I have tons of (stupid) questions. I'll try to narrow them down:
The OS is based on WinCE, but as far as I've understood, it's actually always some customized version of it (via Platform Builder). Only "correct way" of developing anything for it afterwards is to use the SDK the manufacturer usually provides. Right? In my case, the SDK is extremely limited and tightly integrated into IDE as noted above. However, .NET CF 3.5 is capable for interop so its possible to call native libraries -as long as they are compiled for correct platform.
Compiled code is pretty much just instructions for the processor (assembler code) and the compiler chooses the correct instructions based on the target processor setting. Also there's the PE-header that defines under which platform the program is meant to be run. If I target my "helloworld.exe" (does nothing but returns specific exit code) to x86 and compile it with VC, should it work?
If the PE-header is in fact the problem, is it possible to setup for WINCE without the SDK? Do I REALLY need the whole SDK for creating a simple executable that uses only base types? I'm using VS2010, which doesn't even support smart device dev anymore and I'd hate to downgrade just for testing purposes.
Above questions are prequel to my actual idea: Porting ffmpeg/ffdshow for WinCE. This actually already exists, but not targeted nor built for Intel Atom. Comments?
If the native implementation is not possible and I would end up implementing some specific codec with C#...well that would probably be quite a massive task. But having to choose C# over native, could I run into problems with codec performance? I mean.. is C# THAT much slower?
Thank you.
I've not seen an OEM that shipped their own IDE, but it's certainly possible. That shouldn't change how apps can created, however. It's possible that they've done a lot of work to make sure only things from their IDE work, but that would be a serious amount of work for not that much benefit, so I'd think it's unlikely.
As for your specific questions:
The OS is Windows CE, not "based on" it. The OS is, however, componentized, so not all pieces are going to be available. An SDK generally provides a mechanism to filter out what isn't available. You can actually use any SDK that targets the right processor architecture, but if your app calls into a library for something that isn't in the OS, then you'll get at the very least an error. For managed code this is all not relevant because the CF isn't componentized. If it's there, and CF app can run (and if it's not, you can often install it after the fact). This means that if the platform supports the CF, then you can write a CF app and run it. That app can then call native stuff via P/Invoke (unless, of course, the OS creator decided to add security to prevent that. This is possible in the OS, though I've never seen it implemented).
Yes, compiled code is just "instructions". For native, yes, they are processor instructions. For managed, they are MSIL instructions that the managed runtime in turn converts to processor instructions at JIT time. If your target is an ARM platform, you cannot use an x86 compiler. Broadly speaking, you need to use the correct Microsoft compiler that support Windows CE, and call that compiler with the proper switches to tell it not only the processor architecture, but also the target OS because the linking that needs to be done will be different for OS-level APIs and even the C runtimes. The short of this is that for your platform, you need to use Visual Studio 2008 Pro.
For native apps, you need some SDK that targets the same OS version (CE 6.0) and processor architecture (e.g. ARMv4I). Having it match the OS feature set is also useful but not a requirement. For managed code, you can just use the SDKs that ship with Studio because managed code is not processor-dependent. Still, you have to go back to Studio 2008 because 2010 doesn't have any WinCE compilers.
If you've found an existing library, then you can try to use it. Things that might impede your progress are A) it's unlikely to use an SDK you have so you probably have to create new project files (painful, but workable) and B) if it uses features not available in your OS, then you'd have to work around those. If you're missing OS features, you're probably out of luck but if it already has a media player and codec, I suspect you'll be ok.
Don't implement this in managed code. Seriously, just don't do it. Could you? Yes. Performance could probably be made to be nearly the same except to avoid GC stuttering you're going to have to basically create your own memory manager. The amount of work involved in this path is very, very large.
Related
Backgrond
I am very experienced in C and pretty new to Android and Java, but this is rather environmental issues that programming.
I have developed an administrative application in ANSI-C to be ported to any OS, just adding a UI in OS-dependent code. Well it uses quite some memory, especially for huge user files. I have a working Win32 program, trying to make an Android app using Android Studio with NDK.
Android studio bundle NDK installation works fine
I have installed and made a Win7 ultimate Android Studio 1.3 with bundle NDK and made compiling and running the ActionbarStyled (non NDK) hello-jni (NDK) sample in the emulators, smooth and nice. I also in the emulator been successfully running Hello-jni sample with a bunch of extra c-files (not called, at present just garbage, compiled without errors, in this step)
Then I tried to connect my Samsung TAB3 SM-T110 template (one need a Win7 Samsung driver SAMSUNG_USB_Driver_for_Mobile_Phones.zip) to my Win7 and tried it. ActionbarStyled sample works just fine. So does the Hello-JNI sample.
But
Running Hello-jni sample with a bunch of extra c-files I get this error message:
Error while starting native debug session: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unable to find process for com.example.hellojni on device samsung-sm_t110-47900bc50c0c3100
I try to understand what is the issue? Is it lack of memory, the Samsung is full of active running apps, the emulator obviously not.
What makes the Samsung unit to halt the application? Error message is not that describing?
Some more questions supporting handling this kind of issues
We are talking about Android studio 1.3 bundle NDK, how much from earlier setups (in articles) are applicable for this new future NDK standard use?
Memory?
Running the pure Hello-jni sample I have about 6Mb memory (where 5Mb are used), that is pretty poor for my needs, is there something I need to do have my app getting more memory allocated? Is the error message due to running out of memory?
How large Android Apps are possible to do? Are we in a world like the 8-bit DOS 64Kb segment business again? I know it from past but that isen't the case? And if need to know to handle it. The Library for unrestricted heap memory for bitmaps using NDK on Android question is interesting to read, but here we are talking about the jni (C-)code rather than java.
Compiler optimisation?
I have some really huge C-files due to that they are machine generated converting an XML library of documents to C-code (made a program writing C-code from the XSD definitions). In an application I most of the time use only say 5% of all the C-function, the rest are in Windows dev studio/compiler optimised away. Certainly I can reorganise my source code to quite some extra work, but I need to know. How is the optimisation in the Android Studio NDK support?
Thing is in this test no extra C-functions are called except the same regular as in the hello-jni sample. Actually the compiler should make exactly the same in both cases (the modified and the original hello-jni). But obviously it don't. Please explain a bit more how the environment works so I know?
General interest
I tried to find any spot in the Android developers that describe things like compiler behaviour, memory management and environment (the Java handles such completely different, but in C-programming on need to be aware). I think for NDK use it would be interesting getting a good answer here, for the general understanding of the environment, somewhere in the Android developer pages, rather than here. That also includes how the compiler optimises in different situations. But also how to make environmental settings.
As SO returns "4,476 search results for posts containing "win32 gui applications""... I'll have to ask a question that has probably been asked before but is lost in the midst of all those questions.
Currently, what are the options to write GUI applications for Win32, that have a big-enough following so that the environment offers enough and well-supported third-party tools?
I could come up with:
C++
Delphi, and possibly
RealBasic (although the fact that it's originally a Macintosh tool could result in small but noticeable issues in look 'n feel).
Besides their relative lack of well-supported third-party tools, solutions like Python + wxWidgets, or [Power|Pure|Free]Basic aren't good options: The former has too many 1.0 widgets (couldn't find a business-grade grid, for instance), and the latter are procedural languages so requires writing apps like Petzold's book with the lower productivity it entails.
Are there other solutions available?
Thank you.
Edit: Sorry for not having been precise enough: Big tools like .Net and Java are not options. I'm looking for tools that can either build a whole EXE statically (eg. Delphi) or provide a light enough runtime (VBClassic).
If you are new to programming I would suggest C# as well if you are only looking to make this app for the Windows Platform however with tools like Mono it can be ported to OS X and Linux Platforms.
Windows has their own IDE just for this called Visual Studio Express C#
Visual Studio's C#
As well as a version for C++ if you are wanting to say in that programming language.
The Mono project allows you to use C# in Linux and Mac as well as port the apps to iOS and Android
http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page
You Can use C++ or You can even use the .net framework to develop your windows applications. .Net framework have lots of opensource contributed modules and paid modules and well as number of resources all over the internet to speed up the development compare to other options you have mentioned.
If you are going for a windows 32 gui application, I would prefer to go with .net framework, C++.
Java Swings also another best options which is platform independent as well.
You can use Lazarus as a free alternative to Delphi. Potentially you will have a very high possibility to check its "write once, compile anywhere" motto if you later decide to port your Win32 application to Linux or MacOS. In ideal case it will just work, but in reality you would probably need some conditional defines sections.
Apple has killed Carbon for 64 bit applications. I've got a pile of legacy code that targets carbon UI widgets that I'd like to keep alive for a while. Most of it is in the form of plugins and bundles that will have to go 64-bit in sync with their host platform.
The choice that Apple seems to be assuming is to throw all the legacy code away
and rewrite using Cocoa. It's not going to happen in the short run, if only because
the same legacy code is tied to a PC binding as well.
I'm considering 3 Options
(1) Dive into cocoa, create a compatibility package that supports the small subset
of carbon that I actually need.
(2) use Cocoatron as the new target. In the short run bridge carbon-to-cocotron, and maybe in the longer run convert to cocoatron native for both mac and pc. (ref: http://cocotron.org/)
(3) use QT as the new target. See option (2). (ref: http://qt.nokia.com/)
What I would really prefer is a fourth option, such as a bootleg copy of the 64 bit
Carbon beta that Apple killed, or a compatibility package explicitly intended just
to emulate carbon.
I would recommend you choose option 1. Creating a Cocoa UI wrapper for your code will likely not be as complex as you think. A common way to create a cross-platform app is to create the bulk of the app in cross-platform C++ and use Cocoa/Objective-C++ for the Mac UI and one of the Windows APIs for the Windows UI.
This option also has the advantage that it is fully supported by Apple and the APIs are stable and mature.
Cocotron is a nice idea but as of now it's not mature enough (in my opinion) to provide a robust cross-platform solution. I know there are successes with it but the sample size is small.
Qt is an option. However, it suffers from a very un-Mac-like UI. Using a Qt app on the Mac always feels like a quick port rather than a native app, and this is unlikely to ever change.
The "bootleg Carbon runtime" is just a fantasy, there is simply no way to get that working reliably and absolutely no chance to distribute it. You will need to find another way.
I have a few years of experience writing Unix command line tools (no GUI experience) in python, C and C++, and only recently crossed into the GUI world (Cocoa and IOS only). I've learned quite a bit of objective-C and am getting to understand how cocoa MVC works. However, one of the apps I am developing needs a Windows version and I was wondering what a good place to start would be given that I have absolutely no Windows development experience.
I was thinking about using Visual C++ 2010 Express as my development platform (because it's free and because I don't need to learn C++). My application is relatively simple, it will have only two windows and spend most of the time running in the background. It will however need to communicate with the OS (load dll's etc) and an online server (HTTP methods) and I'm not sure whether Visual C++ Express edition gives me access to the required API's. Would a Windows Forms application suffice? Am I going about this the wrong way? Do I need to learn C#? Any advice will be appreciated.
If you are already happy with proper c++, visual Studio C++ express should suit you fine. Given that you are not making a complicated GUI, you don't even need to dip into the managed code - C++ express allows you to create proper c++ console and GUI apps. You also don't need to install the platform SDK - it is part of VS C++ express.
Not being managed C++, you will be able to share source files between your various projects. managed c++, despite the c++ in the name, really is a different enough language that it will be annoying to work with if you simultaneously have to deal with iso C++.
--
Note: The native windows API is a C api, not a C++ framework. So it does not provide a rich set of classes in a coherent framework to deal with. On the other hand, while, large, it is actually quite simple to work with.
Also: Given that you are already familiar with Mac development, there is a LGPL (iirc) package called CFLite that builds on windows and that implements the C api that underlays the Objective-C Cocoa API.
If you use its abstratcions you can share a greater part of code between windows and Mac (and other platforms).
Other C++ IDE's you might want to consider:
Code::Blocks
QT Creator
both of which can be configured to use the MINGW port of GCC to windows.
you'll be better off with c++ than c# if you need more "low-level" stuff. Loading dlls (that is, libs) is simple (pragma comment lib...), as is pure HTTP transfer and communication.
So, VC++ with windows form will suffice, and it is "very c++".
You have access to all global APIs, and loading specific apis like http requires only two lines: one to include wininet header, and other lib (libs are actually "references" to dlls).
If you go the C++ Express way then you need to install Windows SDK separately, and set it up for Visual Studio to use it. And you can't use MFC.
I would however, suggest C#, because it feels like putting little toy bricks together. Easier to debug and maintain. Problem with C# is that it has so many library functions that you can not possibly know if what you want is already made to a function. But that's why we are here :-) If you feel that something you want to do should already exist then ask a question about it. One notable feature that C# lacks is zip archives (it has something similar, but not quite). For zips you can use public libraries, like SharpZipLib or DotNetZip.
If I were you, I wouldn't jump into a whole new API so quickly. Have you considered using Python on Windows? Most of the Python packages I've seen are also available for Windows, so you'll feel at home. And if you need some GUI, you can opt for wxPython, pyGTK or something similar.
For Windows specific things, you can always use ctypes. Especially if they're as simple as loading a DLL.
have you considered approaching Adobe AIR? it allows you to deploy on Mac, Linux, Windows, iOS, etc. communicating with and launching native processes has been possible since 2.0 and the the latest 2.5 SDK can target Android OS and TVs. with your experience you should be able to pick up ActionScript3 / MXML in no time.
additionally, there are a handful of free IDEs you can use with the Flex and AIR SDKs. or, if you're a student or low-income developer, you can get a free copy of Flash Builder 4 from Adobe: http://www.adobe.com/devnet-archive/flex/free/
edit: i believe deploying AIR applications on iPhone requires Flash Professional CS5, which includes the packager for iPhone options. at the same time, i've read that AIR and other cross-compilers for iOS are painfully slow, so it's perhaps best to develop natively in Objective-C for iOS.
I want to create applications in windows that has complete portability (within windows OSes of course). I have tried using one application written in Visual C++ but I had a real tough time in making it run in other windows OS (like it required .net framework libraries to be installed). This put me on the back foot because I had to copy a set of DLLs from one machine to another and most of the time something works some does not.
And I am TOTAL amateur in writing windows based applications since my technological forte is mostly Java. Where to kick off? (like which tools/IDEs to begin with since I am seriously into writing my own utilities/tools).
I am open to clarification should you guys feel my question is vague/blunt.
Thanks.
Visual C++ should be easily able to do what you want. It sounds like you created a C++/.NET project, which will generate a dependency on the .net libraries. You need to choose a different project type when the wizard starts up.
If you have a paid version of Visual C++, you might try clicking on "MFC Application". A lot of people are down on MFC these days, but it's still a quick way to get a C++ Windows app off the ground. Make sure you choose the option to statically link the MFC libraries, or you'll have another dependency.
MFC isn't included in the free version of Visual C++, so you'll need to go old-school and work directly with the Windows API or find another package such as QT or Wx to link with.
You can use .NET, and if you stay in 2.0, use standard components, it should work fine. You may need to make a few changes to work anywhere, buy very possible.
http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page
You could either use Visual Studio or the free IDE. Sharp develope or Mono Develope.
If you really want it to work on every version of windows your best bet may be to go the route of full cross-compatibility. Grab the Boost, QT, and possibly ACE libraries and stay away from making OS calls directly. There's a free version of Visual Studio which is probably what you want for an IDE for personal development, if you're doing commercial stuff then get the full version.
Why not use Java. The JVM is on more systems then .NET and now your app will work on any OS not just windows. Plus java is easier for a beginner then C/C++ and less chance that your program will cause BSODs.