I am writing software (Delphi 2009 Unicode project) which depends on third party library (.dll).
The library is working fine in English language but when I switch the language of application to Russian some characters are not shown correctly. (I can see ?????).
(Application uses several languages - most of them is working fine but especially Russian customers can see this bug).
I found out when I run the software with AppLocale (Russian language) everything works fine.
Also if in Windows Regional settings I set Language for non-Unicode applications to Russian I can see the characters correctly.
How can I achieve the same with code?
As I do not have sources for the library I cannot modify it. I suppose I need to initialize my software the same way as AppLocale do.
Something like calling SetThreadLocale() in application to affect whole application - and also the library.
There is no problem to write C/C++/C# library if this cannot be achieved directly in Delphi.
Related
I want to create a multi-platform application with the focus on handling data from serial port, data processing/analysis and plotting. By now I wrote the application in Python (with a GUI generated by pyQTgraph) which works quiet well - but it is not possible to export my .py to .exe or .app (for Windows and Mac OS). I tried many tools like py2exe, PyInstaller, ...
Now I'm looking for a multi-platform programming language (C, C++, ..., but not Java) witch makes the transfer to other OS easy. Preferably it is possible to transfer the application frow Windows to Mac without big code-changes or redesigning the GUI. It is a lightweight application which should run without a previous installation.
Do you have some hints which programming language and frontend (like QT) is the best for the job?
Does your suggested language works well with serial-port-data?
How does the workflow from writing the code to exporting the final .exe/.app looks like?
Best and thanks
You should probably take a look at Xojo. It builds separate, native apps for Windows, macOS and Linux from the same source project. It also has serial support.
I want to test my software works on Windows regardless of language. Is there a difference between a localised install Windows 7 and an install with the language changed by a language pack? Is it enough just change language packs to confirm my software works or do I need to install a localised version? In particular I want to be sure that the code page used by the API changes.
It's equivalent, you are perfectly safe using a language pack. I'm a bit concerned about your comment regarding code pages though--Windows 7 natively runs in Unicode (Windows 95/98/ME did not and relied on code pages, but this has changed from Windows XP) and it seems unthinkable nowadays not to develop in Unicode, or are you doing something very specific that requires you to use non-Unicode encodings?
If that clarifies things, on Windows XP and beyond, all the ANSI versions of the APIs (ending with a A) simply wrap the Unicode APIs (ending with a W), doing conversion to Unicode and back to ANSI on the way out.
OK, so we're writing our MFC application to make use of the built-in localization support with satellite DLL's since MFC 7. Everything seem to be working fine, except that my Windows 7 Enterprise Edition install with MUI support and using a Swedish UI instead of an English UI still displays the English UI in our application.
The application uses Swedish as its default language, with an English localization DLL in the form AppNameENU.dll, so MFC is actually intentionally switching to English language under these circumstances, as if it's not caring for the user choice in the MUI-enabled Windows OS, and only the default shipping language of the Windows install?
From the MSDN page on this (the link above), I read it as MFC should actually take these settings into account though, but I'm not 100% sure. Can someone please clarify?
It's because the MFC support for language selection has a design bug: It will decide to load resources from the exe only if no DLL match user OR system language.
In your case: It sets up its (ordered) list of languages as such:
Swedish (User language)
English (System language)
Then it looks up your DLLs (Bug: only the dlls, not the exe!): No match for Swedish. But there's a match for English!
Solution: Use my CLanguageSupport class. It works fine even in your use case.
Feel free to use it. You'll need only a couple of minutes to incorporate it into your app and it uses the exact same DLL scheme as the one you already implemented. (Hint: Don't forget the step where you must get rid of the CWinApp::InitInstance() call!)
In addition, if you are interested (this is optional), you can get an automatic languages menu to let user pick his own preference in case the default is not what he wants.
And if you're looking for a great tool to help you manage your translations, think appTranslator ;-)
HTH,
I am working on a new small utility desktop application but I am not really able to choose the GUI framework to use. I have worked on both JAVA,C# and C++, so language is not really a constraint. My criteria are:-
A very well designed architecture, something like QT. It's better if it follows typical C++ design methodologies.
Layout management should be easy, intuitive and not really cumbersome. I hate adjusting pixels on screen.
Its license should be open.
It should look good :)
Mentioned QT seems to comply to all your requirements. QT has "deploy everywhere" attribute, whilst Java needs no deploying at all (it depends on what is use of your utility).
Ad. 2 QT has really convenient GUI designer.
Ad. 3 LGPL. Usually it is enough.
Ad. 4 It is always matter of taste. IMO QT4 looks awesome under linux, but it's windows look'n'feel is correct at best. It's strong point is, that without additional tweaks it almost everywhere looks native.
I've been using Swing, and it works fine. NetBeans (a decent IDE by itself) even supports graphical GUI building.
It's well designed (basically
everything is done with listeners,
functions that are registered for a
certain event). It has bindings, so
you don't have to write code to set
up a value in a text field or read
it out
Layout is not perfect, but
acceptable within NetBeans. It's
WYSIWYG (almost). Look-and-feel can
be changed on the fly.
License is free. Source-code is not
available, I think.
Looks fine on Windows and Linux,
less so on OSX.
You could always try SWT. The advantages of Java with the standard L&F of supported operating systems.
Well designed. Lots of
documentation, and very easy to
develop with. (If you know Swing,
you can pick up SWT in no time.)
I believe layout managers do exist
that support SWT. I'm not positive
about this though, as I typically
don't use layout managers too much.
Uses the Eclipse Public
License. Should meet most of
your requirements.
From Wikipedia on SWT:
SWT is written in Java. To display GUI elements, the SWT implementation accesses the native GUI libraries of the operating system using JNI (Java Native Interface) in a manner that is similar to those programs written using operating system-specific APIs. Programs that call SWT are portable, but the implementation of the toolkit, despite the fact that it is written in Java, is unique for each platform.
Hope that helps you.
I'd suggest wxWidgets if you want to program in C++ or wxPython (the python language binding of wxWidgets if you know or don't mind learning Python.
Architecture is similar to QT I think.
Layout using sizers. Quite easy once you get the hang of it.
Liberal open source license.
Widgets are native on all platforms (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux).
When downloading both Firefox and Chrome, I've noticed that the default version I got was in my native tongue of Hebrew. I personally don't like my applications in Hebrew, since I'm used to the English UI conventions embedded in me since long ago by:
The lack of choice: Most programs don't offer interfaces in multiple languages and when they do, those languages are usually English and the developer's native tongue.
Programming languages which are almost completely bound to the English language.
My question then is this:
If you translate your applications, would you limit the UI to the user's native tongue or give them the choice by enabling more than one language pack by default?
Which language would your application default to (which is interesting mostly if you only install one language pack with your application)?
And also generally I'd like to know how much value do you put into translating your applications on a whole.
I've helped develop an application that was used by Dutch, English, Spanish and Portuguese speaking users. Because the application installed from CD we just added all the language packs. Mostly because it saved us a lot of work not having to maintain 4 different versions.
If your application distributed from a website and you have to support more than only 4 languages I can imagine you don't want to let everyone download every language pack. But only distributing the native languages of people downloading the application seems a bit restrictive. Most people I know actually like their software in english. So at least adding the english language to all the versions makes sense.
I've never written an application for use by a large number of people, and never for anyone that didn't use English as their language, but if I did, I would probably take a route that installs all available language packs at install (unless the user did a custom install, where I would allow them to choose language packs) and then switch between languages as an option inside the program. If I had to only choose one language, I would choose English if I was doing all of the work, or the native language of the users if I had a translator.
When writing an application for multilingual use, I use Microsoft's Best Practices for Developing World-Ready Applications, which includes retrieving the current CultureInfo from the OS and using that as the default language pack.
I usually try to ship products with all available sets of localized resources. Upon a user's first launch of the product, the UI is presented in the localization most closely matching the OS on their machine. Once within the app, the user has the option of switching the UI to one of the other available localizations.
I think it is very important to provide localizations that match one's target markets. Most "normal" people (not software developers!) prefer by far to have a UI in their native language.