I have a problem similar to VS2010 always thinks project is out of date but nothing has changed (I'm also on VS 2010):
I Enabled C++ project system logging which told me that:
00000727 29.93245506 [5864] Project 'C:\foo.vcxproj'
not up to date because 'C:\foo\INTEROP\INTEROP.bar.1.0.DLL'
was modified at 01/22/2014 11:02:49,
which is newer than 'C:\foo\RELEASE\METAGEN.WRITE.1.TLOG'
which was modified at 01/22/2014 16:02:30.
This is apparently telling me that foo project must be rebuilt because either bar.dll or the interop have changed.
foo is a C++/CLI project.
bar is a COM DLL.
foo has bar.dll as one of it's references.
I haven't rebuilt bar.dll (date for the dll file is yesterday).
I haven't modified any settings in project foo (to affect interop).
My question is: Why is Visual Studio deciding the interop is out of date and triggering a re-build on every single run of the application?
Note: This is a web application. foo is directly referenced from the web. bar is not directly referenced by the web.
EDIT:
I've created a simple look-alike solution with just 4 projects (2 for COM, website, and C++/CLI assembly). It seems the C++/CLI assembly always updates the INTEROP.bar.*.DLL file every time any build is triggered. This doesn't seem to be the case in the solution having problems.
This was my mis-understanding: I thought the interop DLL should only be updated if 1) the reference is re-added. 2) The COM object being referenced (possibly just the API) changed.
Apparently, interop.dll is updated every build of caller.
Finally this wording is extremely confusing to me and seems incorrect:
A was modified at 11:02:49, which is newer than B which was modified
at 16:02:30.
How could something from 11:02 be "newer than" something from 16:02? (almost feels like a backwards >= / <= check)
PS - I'm not adding the example solution here, because it doesn't fail like the real solution does.
Sorry for the confusion. It looks like I was leaving out one level of indirection in the dependencies. The chain was: ASP.NET Website -> C++/CLI Assembly -> COM DLL -> C/C++ Native DLL. All in a single solution.
We ended up refactoring to move all the COM DLL code into the C++/CLI Assembly changing it to merely: Web -> C++/CLI Assembly -> C/C++ Native DLL. At this point the problem went away.
It's not a very satisfying answer, but I don't have enough spare cycles to really dig into it now that it's no longer causing trouble.
Related
I'm updating projects in a .NET Framework solution containing a DLL and an EXE to target .NET 5.0. Every call from the from the EXE which touches the DLL is marked with the warning:
Warning CA1416 'MyDllClass.MyProperty<int>(ref int, int, string)' is supported on 'Windows' 7.0 and later
The suggested actions from Microsoft basically amount to either adding cruft to every call or just giving up and suppressing the warnings. Logically, I expected to be able to mark my EXE to declare that it was targeting Windows 7.0 or higher, so that it would give an exception if anyone tried to run it elsewhere, but the compiler could assume this was the baseline for all API calls. Two things I tried, neither of which helped:
Attempt 1
<SupportedOSPlatformVersion>7.0</SupportedOSPlatformVersion>
Attempt 2
<TargetFramework>net5.0-windows7.0</TargetFramework>
What is the elegant way to address this situation? The fact that I'm in control of both projects seems like the best-case scenario.
From EXE Project:
<OutputType>WinExe</OutputType>
<TargetFramework>net5.0-windows</TargetFramework>
<UseWPF>true</UseWPF>
From DLL Project:
<TargetFramework>net5.0-windows</TargetFramework>
<UseWPF>true</UseWPF>
Thanks to a comment by Hans Passant, I tried removing this from my EXE project:
<GenerateAssemblyInfo>false</GenerateAssemblyInfo>
I also had to remove the AssemblyInfo.cs due to auto-generated fields conflicting with fields defined in there. After that, all good, no warnings. I presume the compiler is generating whatever fields it needs to keep itself happy.
I also guess that this would not be an issue on a green-field project and that I only ended up with that element somewhere in the process of migrating the application.
With the risk to fall into too specific question...
Given a C++ MFC (mixed, not shaked) project compiled with /CLR, I have 200 classes already defined.
When I add a new empty class to this project, an error raises when I compile and execute in debug mode.
An unhandled exception of type 'System.IO.FileLoadException' occurred
in Unknown Module.
Additional information: Could not load file or assembly 'ProjectA,
Version=0.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' or one of its
dependencies. Could not find or load a type. (Exception from HRESULT:
0x80131522)
ProjectA is the name of the MFC project itself. There is no reference to any ProjectA assembly on project configuration, and there is no reference to another custom assembly.
This project only have references to some .NET Framework assemblies, in order to allow that some of custom defined classes in the project can use CLR classes.
Then, the question is...
Do you know whether there is any limitation of class number on a MFC C++ project?
EDIT:
As I say in comments, in release mode the compilation succeed without errors.
Also, I clean, build, clean, close Visual Studio, reboot computer... and the problem still appears.
If I keep in 200 classes, there is no error. When I go to 201, the error appears.
Currently I'm trying to reproduce in a new default MFC project, adding classes till arrive to 200, to confirm that there is a real limitation.
EDIT 2: ERROR FIXED
Great. #MSX and #frymode show me how avoid the error with his comments.
In the Visual Studio development environment (source / source):
Open the project's Property Pages dialog box.
Click the C/C++ folder.
Click the Code Generation property page.
Modify the Enable String Pooling (/GF) property.
Thank you guys!
The /GF hack is a known workaround for this problem. It is however not a correct one, you are putting a band-aid on a heavily bleeding wound. Pretty important that you heal the problem instead of putting a patch on it, this heavily affects the way your program runs at runtime as well.
The problem maker is the <Module> class, an internal class that the C++/CLI compiler generates. You can see it with ildasm.exe or a good decompiler. This class is required as a home for declarations in your program that are not class members, valid in native C++ but not supported by the CLR. Which demands that every variable or function declaration is a member of a class. The C++/CLI compiler solves it by moving such a declaration into the <Module> class.
There is however a limit on the number of members in a class, they are represented in the metadata of the .NET assembly with a metadata token. An index into other tables. The upper byte identifies the table number, the lower bytes are the index in the table.
You exceeded that limit. This is bad.
A problem with the /clr compile option is that it works too well. It is capable of compiling any C++03 compliant native C++ code to MSIL. Such code will be just-in-time compiled to machine code by the jitter, just like normal managed code. It is however not verifiable code and it doesn't act like managed code at all, you can blow up your program with pointer fumbles just as easily. And above all, it is not code that's optimized with the native C++ back-end. Only the jitter optimizer has a shot at improving that code, it cannot do nearly the quality job that the native C++ optimizer can do, given that it runs with a hard upper limit on how much time it can spend on doing that job.
Have a look-see with a decompiler to see what ended up in that <Module> class. That's going to be overwheliming at first, you know you've got a big one right now. You fix this problem by spending more time segregating the code into the managed parts and the native parts. Where the native code should be compiled without /clr in effect. It is a per-source file setting, you can even switch back-and-forth in a single source code file with #pragma managed. The simplest way to segregate is by keeping your native code in its own library or DLL.
This link shows that there's no limit to the number of types you can have in a namespace (not a project). Considering, that a namespace can be split across different assemblies, you could, at least in theory, have an unlimited number of types. However, this post affirms that the maximum number of classes in a .DLL
is 16777215. Probably, you'll run out of memory before you reach that number of classes :)
Just for information: there seems to be a limit to the number of fields per class, though.
P.S.:
Here's the solution to your problem taken from this link
Open the project's Property Pages dialog box.
Click the C/C++ folder.
Click the Code Generation property page.
Modify the Enable String Pooling property.
I know there are other questions regarding this subject, and I've looked at this question, but I'd like to see a little bit more discussion and information on both sides of this - is it a better practice to add a project to a solution and reference the project, or to add a reference to the .dll?
It's not much of a choice. If you have a solution with both projects then use a project reference. If your solution doesn't have the project then you have to use an assembly reference.
So the real question should probably be: do I create a solution with both projects? Yes, as long as the project is still in the debug stage and liable to require bug fixes.
If you only have the dll then you're stuck with a dll reference (obviously).
If you have the source then it's usually better to use a project reference. There might be cases where you have a utility library that's never going to change, but if there's the slightest chance of you needing a bug fix then having a project reference is going to make debugging a lot easier.
Summary - Project Reference by Project vs by DLL
Reference by project
code is visible
finds all references e.g. on a class (because code is visible)
better for testing (over all)
better for code redesign (impact)
Reference by DLL
code is hidden
separation between e.g. framework and project (for deliver of framework)
quicker compilation (because DLL is already compiled)
Well, project references are helpful when you are building and testing in both debug and release mode. If you directly add a DLL then you are locked into whatever that particular DLL was built as. The project reference allows this to be a build time decision.
Relative to your project architecture, you should always stick to projects within your problem domain. You should be using the GAC, if that is applicable to your environment.
I have to maintain an old VB 6 ActiveX DLL called by another third-party program for which I have no sources. This DLL works and compiles fine against the API of said program for about 6 years and 3 major versions.
But now when I try to compile the DLL against a new major version the mentioned error occurs. It seems the error occurs before "my" code is called so there´s no use debugging or logging. The only remedy was to compile w/o binary compatibility which is no real option. My Google search turned up quite some people with the same problem but no solution.
Does anybody here know how to fix this issue ?
I finally figure out how to diagnose VB6 error 32801 in a systemic way.
My theory is When the VB6 compiler is creating a project or binary compatible library, the compiler decompiles the type information from the referenced library. Error 32801 occurs the source code's type information is not the same as the referenced library.
There is a tool called OLEView. This tool can decompile the COM type information into an IDL text. What I do is decompile the referenced library in to IDL and take the last good build of the failing library. Most times it is a build server version but the build does not work on a developer workstation. Decompile the last good build. Use a text comparison tool, like WINMerge, and find the differences between the type libraries. The differences make it easy to track down the problem.
Depending on the difference will determine how to correct. Mitigation can be done by either correcting the reference DLL, or by source code correction, or source code references.
It sounds like one of the types in the interfaces defined in your new DLL is different from one in the previous DLL. I'm deducing you use types defined in the third party program in your public interfaces of your DLL. It sounds to me like the third party has changed the definition of one of the types but kept the name and GUIDs the same. You could use something like OLE/COM Object viewer to check whether that's true. If it is true then you can complain to the publisher of the 3rd party program. Do you have enough political power to succeed?
Bruce McKinney, the guru who wrote Hardcore Visual Basic 6, ran into the same issue with a structure in a type library, where he changed some of the member types. The only fix he could find was (essentially) to break binary compatibility - and that's after some correspondence with the VB6 compiler team, who he knew fairly well. I don't think anyone else could do better.
There is a discussion about this error on devx.com that seems to indicate that the problem stemmed from Microsoft's Scripting Runtime (scrrun.dll).
FileSystemObject compatibility Unexpected error (32810)
Does your DLL reference that library? If so, can you remove the reference (e.g., replace FileSystemObject functionality with intrinsic VB file handling functions and/or API calls).
Are any of the files associated with the core project being compiled marked as Read-Only (i.e. not checked out of SourceSafe or similar repository)?
*.exp
*.vbw
*.lib
---------------------------
Microsoft Visual Basic
---------------------------
Unexpected error (32810)
---------------------------
OK Помощ
---------------------------
This the message I was getting trying to reference in VBIDE an old OCX that has been recompiled recently.
After somewhat long research the offending lines of code causing this error appeared to be
Property Get MouseActivate() As BookmarkEnum
Just changed this to
Property Get MouseActivate() As Boolean
. . . and the error was gone.
BookmarkEnum is an enum from ADO. Our build server is Server 2003 and my dev machine is Win10. The project references ADO 2.8 but apparently this typelib has some differences on Server 2003 vs Win10
This I think is related to my use of the nlog C++ API (and my question on the nlog forum is here); the purpose of my asking this question here is to get a wider audience to my problem and perhaps to also get some more general ideas behind the VB6 IDE's failure to build in my particular scenario.
Briefly, the problem that I am having is that I am having trouble building VB6 components which reference unmanaged C++ components which have calls to nlog's C\C++ API (which is defined in NLogC.DLL). The build problems are not occurring during compile time, they are occurring when the binary is being built which suggests to me that it's some kind of linker type problem? Don't know enough about how VB6 binaries are produced to tell. The VB6 binary is produced, but it is corrupted and crashes shortly after it is invoked.
Has anyone had any similar experiences with VB6 (doesn't have to be related to nlog or C++)?
edit: Thanks for all the responses to this rather obscure problem. Still no headway unfortunately; my findings since I posted this:
'Tweaking' the compile options doesn't appear to help in this problem.
Adding a reference to the nlog-enabled C++ component from a 'blank' VB6 project doesn't crash it or cause weird build problems. So it isn't a 'native' VB6 issue, possibly an issue with the interaction between nlog and the various components and 3rd party libraries used by other referenced components?
As for C++ calling conventions: the nlog-enabled C++ component is - as far as I can see - compliant to these conventions and indeed works fine when referenced by VB6 as long as it is not making any nlog API calls. Not sure if the nlogc.DLL itself is VB6 compliant but I would have thought that that is immaterial since the API calls are being made from the C++ component; VB6 shouldn't know or care about what the C++ component is referencing (that's as far as my understanding on this goes...)
edit2: I should also note that the error message obtained during build is: "Errors during load. Please refer to "xxx" for details". When I bring up the log file, all that there is in there is: "Cannot load control xxx". Interestingly, all references to that particular control disappears from that particular project resulting in compile errors if I were to try to build again.
Got around the problem by using NLog's COM interface (NLog.ComInterop.DLL) from my unmanaged C++ code. Not as easy to do as the C\C++ API but at least it doesn't crash my VB6 components.
I would try tweaking some of the Compile options found in the Project, Properties menu, Compile panel to see if they yield any additional hints as to what is going wrong.
For example if you compile the executable to p-code rather than native code does it still crash on startup.
What error message do you get when you run your compiled binary?
I doubt the compiler/linker is the problem: project references in a VB6 project are not linked into the final executable. A project reference in VB6 is actually a reference to a COM type library (which may or may not be embedded in a .dll or other binary file type). Project references primarily serve two purposes:
The IDE extracts type information from the referenced type libraries which it then displays in the Object Browser (and in the Intellisense drop-down)
At compile-time, the compiler extracts the type information stored in the referenced libraries, including the CLSID of each class that you instantiate, and embeds this data into the executable. This allows your executable to create instances of classes contained in the libraries that you referenced.
Note that the compiled binary doesn't link to any code in the referenced libraries, and it doesn't even contain the filenames of the referenced libraries. The final executable only contains the CLSID's and other type information that it needs to instantiate COM objects at run-time.
It is much more likely that the issue is with NLog, or with how you are calling it from your code, rather than something gone awry in the VB6 compile process.
If you think it might be a linker problem, this should crash it the same way:
create a new standard project (of any kind)
add a new module and copy the "declare"-statements into it
compile
If it doesn't crash it is something else.
It would help an exact description of the error or a screenshot of what going on.
One thing to check is wherever NLogC.DLL or the C++ DLL you built have the correct calling convention defined. Basically you can't have the DLL function names mangled or use anything but the STDCALL calling convention. If the C++ DLL has not been created with those two things in mind then it will fail to work with VB6.
MSDN Article on Calling convention.
"Cannot load control xxx" errors can be caused by .oca files which were created from a different version of an .ocx than currently used. If that is the case, deleting the .oca files helps.