What is this Common Language Runtime that I've been hearing about?
I've recently started a project to create my own, small, personal windows application. I've used DirectX for drawing in the window and such before, for games and whatnot, however this time, I wanted to make it a more standard style application, with menus, and selectable text, and right clicking.
I've searched, but I found no information on how to actually write code for such things, I've only found things telling me to use the drag-and-drop form interface, for windows.
Anyways, I've found that using the forms, actually lets me see the code behind it, too, so I guess I could learn that way....
...but its forcing me to compile using CLR. Why? What is CLR? Can I not create this style of windows application without it?
-Stefan
CLR (Common Language Runtime) is a Virtual Machine. Whenever you compile your .Net programs they are converted into an intermediate language whereas a regular compiler would compile to native code of the target platform. Now whenever there is a CLR implementation available for an OS your program will run on that OS. This is how your .Net programs are portable! Read more here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write_once,_run_anywhere
The CLR is the runtime for the .Net framework.
You can only run .Net code on the CLR.
Since WinForms is a .Net library, you can only use WinForms in .Net.
Related
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.
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 make an easy to deploy Windows application and was was wondering which programming systems can create totally self contained Windows .exe files?
As a plus, if the same can be done with MacOSX and Linux from the same source this would be a bonus. I took a look at Realbasic but they have since abandoned the single .exe concept.
update: i am looking for something that can run from Windows XP up to Windows 7, no matter what version of .NET is installed. Is this even possible?
Delphi compiles to one executable, and generates native windows executables. So no dependencies to any kind of framework. If you use Free Pascal (fpc) and the Lazarus IDE, you could even develop for Linux and Apple from the same source.
If your using external dll's this would become a bit more tricky, but you could pack them up in your resource file and still maintain the one exe property.
Update 2020: since #Vassilis & #Marco van der Voort commented on this, I would like to update my old andswer and add that go is a very good way to make self-contained executables. Even crossplatform compilation is realy simple.
You can certainly do this with C/C++. Technically the runtime libraries are required, but they should already be installed on any windows, mac or linux system.
With .NET you can compile to an EXE, but of course the .NET framework is required. For newer versions of windows it should be installed by default, but on older versions (XP or older?) it may or may not be there. And of course you couldn't expect mono to be there by default on linux or mac either.
For Windows the following languages are viable:
C (MS, gcc)
C++ (MS, g++, Digital Mars)
D (Digital Mars)
Delphi (Embarcadero??? how do you spell that? just trips off the tongue doesn't it?)
Fortran (Intel, Salford Software)
Visual Basic 6 (MS)
Lua (you'll need a special tool to do it, but it is doable)
C#, VB.Net, F#, J#, etc (assuming that you don't mind using .Net technology)
You can use Tcl/tk. The technology you should research is a "starpack", which combines a runtime executable (a starkit) with a platform-specific runtime (a "tclkit") to create a single-file executable. It's remarkable in the fact that it's not just compiled code, but an entire self-contained virtual filesystem that can include images, sound, data, etc.
This same technology works for many platforms from the same code base. The only thing that is different is the platform-specific runtime. You can even "cross compile" in that you can copy the runtime for multiple platforms onto your dev box and then build starpacks for each platform without having to actually be on each platform.
Tcl can do this, especially through producing starpacks. They can be produced for all platforms from the same code. Note that this also includes all the necessary runtime libraries (except for things like the C library, but you don't want to make that static under normal circumstances).
JavaFX 2.2 supports that. It allows creation of self-contained applications targeting Windows, Mac OS, and Linux.
Please follow this link for more information: http://docs.oracle.com/javafx/2/deployment/self-contained-packaging.htm.
I would recommend taking a look at AutoIt. It is an easy-to-use scripting language that will compile into an exe, so there are no runtimes needed. This would be for windows only though.
http://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/index.shtml
From the website:
AutoIt v3 is a freeware BASIC-like
scripting language designed for
automating the Windows GUI and general
scripting. ... AutoIt is also very small,
self-contained and will run on all
versions of Windows out-of-the-box
with no annoying "runtimes" required!
c/c++
purebasic
delphi
vb6
i hope this help :)
Here's a good source for a number of basic-like programming languages that build small stand-alone EXEs. Some are cross-platform for Windows and Linux:
www.basic.mindteq.com
You can use Liberty Basic which is easy and cheap, you can easily make stand alone programs for windows but not possible to transfer to MacOS or Linux.
You can do this for Windows with .NET languages using ILMerge
ILMerge is a utility for merging multiple .NET assemblies into a single .NET assembly. It works on executables and DLLs alike and comes with several options for controlling the processing and format of the output. See the accompanying documentation for details.
However:
Currently, ILMerge works only on Windows-based platforms. It does not yet support Rotor or Mono.
QBasic can :-)
I wrote a few command line tools using it!
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.
Have a quick project I need to put together for windows that can have no external references or dependencies; the stalwarts like C are obvious but if you are a .NET developer and need to build something like this very quick what language/tool would you use?
EDIT: Ultimately I want to be able to take JUST the exe produced by the compiler and put it alone on a windows machine and have the app run.
If you're a .net developer, you could consider something like using Remotesoft's Salamander or another similar tool that compiles everything into a single executable (including the framework).
This option lets you develop in .net, but not install the .net framework on your client's systems. If you're deploying on non-MS systems, you can use the Mono's deployment tools to accomplish the same thing for free.
In general, I'd say stick to the tools and languages you know. It's easier to build an installer to install the .net framework then it is to learn a new suite of tools, libraries, etc.
You can do it for practically any language (I'm excluding the obvious C/C++)
You can bundle the .NET runtime into your .exe and write the app in C#
You can write the app in Python and bundle everything into a single .exe using a tool like py2exe. I do this regularly. One can create great-looking and powerful applications with Python and PyQt, bundle everything into a single no-dependencies executable and deploy to users w/o a need to install anything else. The executable is a few MB large (~9 with PyQt), and loads and runs quickly.
Etc.
It's more important which language / environment do you currently know well. Focus on that, because the tools do exist for anything you'd want to use.
Delphi has always been the best product for producing stand-alone .EXEs for Windows. No Microsoft product has ever come near it in that regard.
I think a good allround answer to this is Free Pascal via the Lazarus IDE.
Free Pascal applications are native and dependency-free, and a lot of platforms are supported. Too many to list here! Free Pascal itself is a free and open source compiler.
For better convenience, I strongly recommend using the Lazarus IDE. Now you even get a RAD IDE for cross-platform GUI applications (as well as console), with a sizable set of builtin features, like database support. Really a pretty lovely all-in-one, often underestimated or even unknown, platform that produces self contained, native executables. There aren't all too many of those tools if you think about it. You can even cross-compile from it, for example to compile a GUI application for Linux on Windows, no virtual machines necessary.
One day, I wish .NET Native could get this far, but it is currently far from capable and I'm not sure if Microsoft even intends to go there. Google's Go language is also nice in that it compiles to native cross-platform code, but lacks a GUI library. Python can have its code packaged into executables but it's kind of a kludge and not native code. And so on...
C/C++ would be your language but don't use any fancy libraries like MFC, MSVCRT, etc. or if you do link them statically to your executable.
"No external references" is a bit vague. Are you talking about a deployment solution for an application?
For example, you can use Tcl which supports the ability to create a single file executable that contains both the application code and a virtual filesystem that can contain any other files needed by the application. If your goal is to create a single file that can be deployed without having to install extra files, read up about "starkits" and "starpacks".
If you target a Windows Vista .NET 3.0 is preinstalled,
If you target a Windows 7 .NET 3.5 is preinstalled, if you use no other libraries than the ones included in those distributions then you app will run. Installing .NET isn't really that much work anyway, just ship with the redistributable.
Assembler. Your only dependency is the CPU
Here's a left field answer...
Tcl
combined with starkits, you can create a simple double-clickable .exe with no need for an installer.
the downside, of course, is that it'll be written in tcl.
As an added bonus, you'll be able to port your app trivially to mac or linux (or a range of other odd operating systems)
Do you consider the .NET Framework "external"? If you stick to .NET Framework and use C#, your code should run anywhere the .NET Framework of appropriate version is installed, and you'll only need to deploy your .exe and .exe.config.
It is not possible to run a .NET program without the .NET Framework. If you can't require the .NET Framework to already be installed, then you cannot use a .NET program. That's what I meant.
I've no clue what the downvotes are about, but let me try once more to clarify. The original post said:
the stalwarts like C are obvious but
if you are a .NET developer and need
to build something like this very
quick what language/tool would you
use?
The answer is that if you are a .NET developer, there is no tool or language you can use for this purpose, as every .NET program requires the .NET Framework be installed. If you need a program that is entirely independant, then don't use .NET. As others have replied, you can bundle .NET into your exe. You can also have .NET installed with your application, if you're willing to ship a .MSI file and not just your exe.
But, by definition, a .NET program cannot be independent of the .NET Framework.