I am looking for a nice way to have a C++ library exposed to Dart/Flutter and SWIFT (obviously targetting mobile here).
'been around SWIG for a long time, but can't find anything for new languages like Dart/Flutter & SFWIT (targetting Android/IOS dev).
We already have the Python and Java binding on SWIG, would be great to get those 2.
If SWIG can't do the trick, is there other wrappers of the like more appropriate?
There is no straight way to export C++ library to Dart/Flutter
Take advantage of dart:ffi (with package:ffi &
package:ffigen), to interact with C wrapper of C++
Use Fluttter plugin to bridge call from MethodChannel
to C++ library
Alternative (not tested!!!) use emscripten aka C++ -> asm.js then load it in flutter using the EmscriptenModule.
ref: https://pub.dev/documentation/web_ffi/latest/web_ffi_modules/EmscriptenModule-class.html
Also look at https://github.com/rwl/emscripten in the same mood.
Related
I'm a Python guy building a Linux-based web service for a client who wants me to interface with a small C++ library that they're currently using with a bunch of Windows based VB applications.
They have assured me that the library is fairly simple (as far as they go I guess), and that they just need to know how best to compile and deliver it to me so that I can use it in Python under Linux.
I've read a bit about the ctypes library and other options (SWIG, etc), but for some reason I haven't really been able to wrap my head around the concept and still don't know how to tell them what I need.
I'm pretty sure having them re-write it with Python.h, etc is out, so I'm hoping there's a way I can simply have them compile it on Linux as a .so and just import it into Python. Is such a thing possible? How does one accomplish this?
No, such a thing is not possible.
Either they have to provide Python bindings, or you do. Either one of you can do this in any of the following ways:
Using <Python.h> directly to write a C extension module.
Using boost::python to make writing the extension module much easier (especially when they're using C++ rather than C).
Using SWIG, SIP, or similar tools to partly automate the writing of the extension module.
Using Cython to write the extension module in a Python-like language, instead of in C or C++.
Using ctypes from within Python.
For very simple cases (especially if they're actually exporting a C interface to their C++ code), ctypes probably is the easiest solution. Otherwise, I'd suggest looking at Cython first. But at any rate, you're going to have to wrap your head around one of the solutions—or convince them to do it instead.
Due to complexities of the C++ ABI (such as name mangling), it's generally difficult and platform-specific to load a C++ library directly from Python using ctypes.
I'd recommend you either create a simple C API which can be easily wrapped with ctypes, or use SWIG to generate wrapper types and a proper extension module for Python.
I have used Lua.NET on .NET platform and I could call the .NET class/object from Lua and I could call the Lua from .NET Lua API interface. I did the same with the IronPython. I knew the how the .NET binding works.
Now I have a C++ project and I want to use the dynamic capabilities. I want to call C++ object which may not be possible from Lua so I may need to call some C API which makes call to C++. Meantime I want to call the Lua from C++.
We have configuration data which is best described in table like format in Lua or List & Dict like in Python. We need to enumerate these data structures defined in Lua/Python in C++.
When considering Lua to Python in C++ for two way calling, is Python have upper hand with Boost Python library? I don't have experience in Python/C++ binding. I don't have equal experience of using Python in C++ and calling Python from C++.
When considering Lua to Python in C++ for two way calling, is Python have upper hand with Boost Python library?
There are a few libraries that simplify the communication between C++ and Lua. One of them, luabind, is inspired by boost.python and is quite powerful and fairly easy to use.
Other C++ <-> Lua libraries to consider: toLua++, SWIG
If you are planning to just use windows you could use C++/CLI a managed variant of C++. With C++/CLI you can easily mix managed and unmanaged code. You could call the managed classes from any .net language and the unmanaged (exported) functions from C.
I am an experienced C/C++ developer but I am a novice in Ruby.
How can I call a C++ function from with in Ruby?
You have 3 possibilities :
1) Ruby is able to load libraries. Even if it is a bit tricky, you can decide to write your own loader and bind your C++ library in Ruby.
This is done using what is called an extension module. You will find a comprehensive tutorial here: http://www.rubyinside.com/how-to-create-a-ruby-extension-in-c-in-under-5-minutes-100.html
2) You can use a tool that will generate the Ruby wrapper around your C++ library. Look at SWIG for example (http://www.swig.org/).
You just have to create a file in a swig-specific syntax and provide it to SWIG. It will then be able to generate the wrapper for many languages, Ruby included.
3) You can choose to use a middleware, such as CORBA/ICE/whatever. It may be a bit overkill if you only want to call some C++ functions, but it will allow you to remote call the functions, or "hide" a grid behind the middleware.
To call C++ code from Ruby, you will likely want to build an extension.
If you are an experienced C++ developer, you may feel comfortable with Rice:
https://github.com/jasonroelofs/rice
It uses C++ metaprogramming techniques to simplify writing extensions.
If you were calling into C, you could also use ffi. Calling C++ code is a little more complicated than calling C code due to name mangling and exceptions.
I believe the questioner is asking how to call C++ from with in Ruby, if so then the for simple C/C++ RubyInline1 is by the far the simplest solution.
Alternatively if you need to call more substatntial C++ code, you can build a ruby extension. Here is a good tutorial
You need to wrap your c++ code in a C interface and then bind those C functions to ruby methods using rb_define_method()
alternatively you can use SWIG, as Aurelien said.
I'm learning C++ because it's a very flexible language. But for internet things like Twitter, Facebook, Delicious and others, Python seems a much better solution.
Is it possible to integrate C++ and Python in the same project?
Interfacing Python with C/C++ is not an easy task.
Here I copy/paste a previous answer on a previous question for the different methods to write a python extension. Featuring Boost.Python, SWIG, Pybindgen...
You can write an extension yourself in C or C++ with the Python C-API.
In a word: don't do that except for learning how to do it. It's very difficult to do it correctly. You will have to increment and decrement references by hand and write a lot of code just to expose one function, with very few benefits.
Swig:
pro: you can generate bindings for many scripting languages.
cons: I don't like the way the parser works. I don't know if they've made some progress but two years ago the C++ parser was quite limited. Most of the time I had to copy/paste my .h headers to add some % characters and to give extra hints to the swig parser.
I also needed to deal with the Python C-API from time to time for (not so) complicated type conversions.
I'm not using it anymore.
Boost.Python:
pro:
It's a very complete library. It allows you to do almost everything that is possible with the C-API, but in C++. I never had to write a C-API code with this library. I also never encountered a bug due to the library. Code for bindings either works like a charm or refuses to compile.
It's probably one of the best solutions currently available if you already have some C++ library to bind. But if you only have a small C function to rewrite, I would probably try with Cython.
cons: if you don't have a precompiled Boost.Python library you're going to use Bjam (sort of a replacement of make). I really hate Bjam and its syntax.
Python libraries created with B.P tend to become obese. It also takes a lot of time to compile them.
Py++: it's Boost.Python made easy. Py++ uses a C++ parser to read your code and then generates Boost.Python code automatically. You also have a great support from its author (no it's not me ;-) ).
cons: only the problems due to Boost.Python itself.
Edit this project looks discontinued. While probably still working it may be better to consider switching.
Pybindgen:
It generates the code dealing with the C-API. You can either describe functions and classes in a Python file, or let Pybindgen read your headers and generate bindings automatically (for this it uses pygccxml, a python library wrote by the author of Py++).
cons: it's a young project, with a smaller team than Boost.Python. There are still some limitations: you cannot expose your own C++ exceptions, you cannot use multiple inheritance for your C++ classes.
Anyway it's worth trying!
Pyrex and Cython:
Here you don't write real C/C++ but a mix between Python and C. This intermediate code will generate a regular Python module.
Edit Jul 22 2013: Now Py++ looks discontinued, I'm now looking for a good alternative. I'm currently experimenting with Cython for my C++ library. This language is a mix between Python and C. Within a Cython function you can use either Python or C/C++ entities (functions, variables, objects, ...).
Cython is quite easy to learn, has very good performance, and you can even avoid C/C++ completely if you don't have to interface legacy C++ libraries.
However for C++ it comes with some problems. It is less "automagic" than Py++ was, so it's probably better for stable C++ API (which is now the case of my library). The biggest problem I see with Cython is with C++ polymorphism. With Py++/boost:python I was able to define a virtual method in C++, override it in Python, and have the Python version called within C++. With Cython it's still doable but you need to explicitly use the C-Python API.
Edit 2017-10-06:
There is a new one, pybind11, similar to Boost.Python but with some potential advantages. For example it uses C++11 language features to make it simpler to create new bindings. Also it is a header-only library, so there is nothing to compile before using it, and no library to link.
I played with it a little bit and it was indeed quite simple and pleasant to use. My only fear is that like Boot.Python it could lead to long compilation time and large libraries. I haven't done any benchmark yet.
Yes, it is possible, encouraged and documented. I have done it myself and found it to be very easy.
Python/C API Reference Manual - the API used by C and C++ programmers who want to write extension modules or embed Python.
Extending and Embedding the Python Interpreter
describes how to write modules in C or C++ to extend the Python interpreter with new modules. Those modules can define new functions but also new object types and their methods. The document also describes how to embed the Python interpreter in another application, for use as an extension language. Finally, it shows how to compile and link extension modules so that they can be loaded dynamically (at run time) into the interpreter, if the underlying operating system supports this feature.
Try Pyrex. Makes writing C++ extensions for Python easier.
We use swig very successfully in our product.
Basically swig takes your C++ code and generates a python wrapper around it.
I'd recommend looking at how PyTorch does their integration.
See this:
Extending Python with C or C++
"It is quite easy to add new built-in modules to Python, if you know how to program in C. Such extension modules can do two things that can't be done directly in Python: they can implement new built-in object types, and they can call C library functions and system calls.
To support extensions, the Python API (Application Programmers Interface) defines a set of functions, macros and variables that provide access to most aspects of the Python run-time system. The Python API is incorporated in a C source file by including the header "Python.h". "
http://www.python.org/doc/2.5.2/ext/intro.html
PS It's spelt "integrate" :)
I've used PyCxx http://cxx.sourceforge.net/ in the past and i found that it was very good.
It wraps the python c API in a very elegant manner and makes it very simple to use.
It is very easy to write python extension in c++. It is provided with clear examples so it is easy to get started.
I've really enjoyed using this library and I do recommend it.
It depends on your portability requirements. I've been struggling with this for a while, and I ended up wrapping my C++ using the python API directly because I need something that works on systems where the admin has only hacked together a mostly-working gcc and python installation.
In theory Boost.Python should be a very good option, since Boost is available (almost) everywhere. Unfortunately, if you end up on a OS with an older default python installation (our collaboration is stuck with 2.4), you'll run into problems if you try to run Boost.Python with a newer version (we all use Python 2.6). Since your admin likely didn't bother to install a version of Boost corresponding to every python version, you'll have to build it yourself.
So if you don't mind possibly requiring some Boost setup on every system your code runs on, use Boost.Python. If you want code that will definitely work on any system with Python and a C++ compiler, use the Python API.
Another interesting way to do is python code generation by running python itself to parse c++ header files. OpenCV team successfully took this approach and now they have done exact same thing to make java wrapper for OpenCV library. I found this created cleaner Python API without limitation caused by a certain library.
You can write Python extensions in C++. Basically Python itself is written in C and you can use that to call into your C code. You have full access to your Python objects. Also check out Boost.Python.
Are their any libraries which provide functionality similar to mono but for the c++ language? I know boost exists, but I like mono much more than boost.
I'm looking to do more than what's available in the base library set, like play sound more easily (crossplatform), GUI, load images, time, etc. I guess I am looking for what people might consider an engine or a large library.
Mono is a .NET implementation. Mono is NOT a library.
There is NO Mono for C++. At least, not yet.
I think you want a multi-platform framework, such as Qt
If you're wanting to work with Managed C++ a la .Net, then you would just use Mono. They have a page describing how to go about it. The only catch is that you have to compile on Windows, as there is not yet any flavor of GCC that outputs .Net CLI for C++.
To be honest, though, if you're going to use Mono, you might as well move into C#. It's a much cleaner language, IMO.
CLI is only able to host C++ compiled code on all supported platforms as long as the compiled code only contains CIL not native code.
for more detail visit
http://www.mono-project.com/CPlusPlus
I'm not sure about your precise requirements, but in terms of large multi-purpose packages: Qt has been mentioned by a few folks. wxWidgets (formerly wxWindows) is another option. GTK is multiplatform.
As you use the word "engine" (often a game-related term), you might be interested in SDL, which has been used by numerous games, professional and amateur alike. SFML is an option. ClanLib is another long-lived library I've heard of, though I'll admit to knowing little about it.
Try the STL collections...Has nothing to do with .NET, but they are a nice collection of collections (lol) and make C++ life easier.
It sounds like what you are really looking for is a C++ framework that offers the kinds of functionality found in the .NET/Mono framework. Qt is a popular choice.
On the topic of C++ interoperability, Mono has recently made some pretty big strides with CXXI.
(From this posting): The short story is that the new CXXI technology allows C#/.NET developers to:
Easily consume existing C++ classes from C# or any other .NET
language
Instantiate C++ objects from C#
Invoke C++ methods in C++ classes from C# code
Invoke C++ inline methods from C# code (provided your library is compiled with -fkeep-inline-functions or that you provide a surrogate
library)
Subclass C++ classes from C#
Override C++ methods with C# methods
Expose instances of C++ classes or mixed C++/C# classes to both C# code and C++ as if they were native code.
CXXI is the result of two summers of work from Google's Summer of Code towards improving the interoperability of Mono with the C++ language.