I hope you are doing good and i really appreciate your help here for my query.
We have our system T3000 written in C++ (http://www.temcocontrols.com/ftp/software/9TstatSoftware.zip and codes are available here https://github.com/temcocontrols/T3000_Building_Automation_System).
I am trying to integrate 'BIRT reporting tool' in my C++ application. I want to create report based on the data available in our T3000 system. I think BIRT is embeddable (??). We don't need to compile and change the project, just need to be able to call it from T3000.exe mainly.
My thinking is we may put one menu label in existing T3000 and try to display report in user single click.
Can you please help me to solve my issue with 'BIRT' ? I really appreciate your answer.
Regards
Raju
Well, the answer depends on what your definition of "embeddable" is.
BIRT is written in pure Java.
I could think of 3 different ways:
Of course it is possible to integrate Java code into an existing C/C++ program (see Embed Java into a C++ application?).
You could just use the BIRT runtime engine and generate the report as PDF or HTML from the command line (that means, basically you call the java executable from your program with several arguments). See Birt - How to run report engine on the console? and http://eclipser-blog.blogspot.de/2008/02/automatic-generation-of-birt-reports.html for more information.
You could run a Java web server like Tomcat in a second process and then start your report by calling a http URL (e.g. you could use the included Servlet example). See http://www.eclipse.org/birt/documentation/integrating/viewer-usage.php
Similar to 3. (see below)
Some notes:
The second option is slow, due to the Java and BIRT engine startup overhead (this may take several seconds). With the first and third option, the startup overhead is or can be minimized to only once (and for each report).
For the second and third option it may be necessary to modify the existing code of the example programs to suit your needs.
The first option is probably the best for an industry-quality solution, but it is also the most difficult to develop.
Anyway, Java skills are necessary IMHO.
If you plan to run this on a SOC instead of a PC, take performance into account.
Is a Java-based solution well-suited for this kind of hardware? BIRT needs quite a lot of RAM and CPU (for a SOC). Hardware like the Raspi 3 should handle this quite easily, I reckon.
I integrated the BIRT runtime into an existing Python application (all this running on an application server) in a fourth way: I wrote a listener program that listens on a TCP socket for BIRT tasks. It uses a pool of worker processes (written in Java) which in turn use the BIRT report engine to generate the output. The client program (here: written in Python) opens a TCP connection to the listener and uses this socket to tell it which report to generate (including report parameters and destination file name). The listener program then in turn chooses a worker process for the task and gives the task to the worker process.
So, basically, this fourth option is similar to the third one, with two differences:
The communication is socket-based (instead of http), allowing bi-di communication.
The architecture is multi-processes instead of multi-threading. We choose this because very large reports could cause out-of-memory errors for otherwise unrelated reports that just happen to run at the same time. It's the same basic architecture Oracle chose for their reports server.
However, developing the programs took months.
HVB: I have to give you more than a simple thanks for the explanation above, this info will save us time I am sure. Raju will be sharing our experience after we get into the project a little deeper so others can benefit.
Related
I'm working on an interactive command-line tool. The tool shows a prompt, and the user can enter commands and parameters which are being processed. After a command was executed, thhere is a new prompt and the user can proceed entering commands. It is very similar to gdb debugger, when used in cli mode.
The tool is mostly written in C++, with some wrappers for using C librarys.
I'd like to attach a GUI (QT would be my first choice here) to my tool, however, I'm not sure how to do this.
If you search the internet, many Unix developers prefer to strictly separate back- and frontend.
So, I'm thinking about making the GUI a separate executable, which just uses the functionality of my command line tool.
What's the best way to achieve this?
Should I use interproces communication with pipes or sockets?
gdb, for example, uses TCP/IP, allowing to even run the GUI not on the same machine as the server! (However, this feature is not necessary).
If using some kind of IPC, how should the communication work? Should I use an ASCII interface (The Art Of Unix Programming prefers this)? This would have the advantage that my GUI just needs to parse the output of my command line tool. I don't have to change my tool very much, because it does not make much difference if the tool writes to a socket/pipe or just to cout.
If so, should I define a protocol for IPC or just parse the input/output?
Another way would be to integrate the GUI to my tool directly, resulting in just one executable. Insight debugger does it this way. Insight not just "uses" gdb, it has its own gdb in its programm code.
This way I won't have to write a parser, my GUI code can just call functions from my "base code".
Or should I make my command line tool a library, which I can link with a cli- or a GUI frontend?
What would be the best way to solve my problem?
What are the avantages/disadvantes of the solutions above?
What do you prefer?
As you noted in the question, there are several ways you can architect two pieces of software. There are three questions you want to ask yourself:
what's the relationship between the two code segments.
how likely is each code segment going to change in the future.
how is your code going to be deployed
If one code segment is strictly a layer of abstraction on top of the other layer (the CLI code in your case), the core CLI functionality is relatively mature and stable, whereas you find it likely the the GUI will likely change often, this might suggest that you make the CLI code a library, and have the GUI code include the library and "call down" to the CLI code. If, on the other hand, the GUI code ties a bunch of pieces of software together, whereas the CLI code is a smaller, more isolated module and will likely change at a higher frequency rate (think dvd inside a dvd player) you might consider making your GUI a framework that imports different 'engines', or CLI modules. If you expect the two code segments to have a side-by-side relationship, for example the GUI might make HTTP requests to download images while the CLI code might do some CPU intensive number crunching in the background, then you might want to explore having both the CLI and GUI running as separate threads and communicating with other. [Depending on how closely coupled the two code segments are you can explore separate threads (no coupling), occasional message passing (message-queues) to using threads and fine-grained locks (very tightly coupled).]
separate processes (with the optional socket interface to run on different machines) are very useful when breaking down large software deployments into smaller, modular units. As long as your code can still fit in your head, and is less than roughly ~10,000 lines of code the added code complexity and latency isn't justified.
From your description it sounds as though the CLI code is mature, and the GUI is going to be simply a shell which interacts with the CLI. I also understand that you intended to ship your code as an executable. Therefore I think your use cases falls in line with making your CLI code a library, and writing a CLI shell and GUI shell that interface with it.
I have an interesting conundrum. I have been challenged with identifying the most suitable process in which to create a "browser front-end" to an existing multi-user application built within the TigerLogic/Pick D3 environment. My research indicates there are many ways to do this; but I am struggling to decide which method is best or where to start. I have "played" with a few technologies but a commitment to one is needed to get started.
These methods include:
Creation of a complex webservice using MVS Toolkit; and engineering a client from WSDL either from scratch or using maven/wsimport. Tests indicate there is a lot more to this process than originally though for a simply WSDL.
Development of a Java based web app that harnesses the MVSPJavaAPI - I am not a JAVA developer so this means learning a new language. Development would most likely take place in Eclipse.
Using TigerLogics FlashCONNECT - resulting in additional expenditure to clients so not preferable - and more or less ruled
out.
There is also the .NET option - but I have ruled this out on the basis of needing portability.
My question is, has anyone else out there done anything like this and could you share your experience? My first task is to build a web-app that will reliably give me the D3 TCL prompt in a browser that I can customise.
I am not sure there is a definitive answer here but would like peoples thoughts and will label the most useful as the answer.
What path you choose depends in some part on your existing skill-set and whether that fits in with your portability needs. It is very difficult to give you a concrete answer to your question becaue of not knowing in which part of the chain you need the portability.
It is however possible to develop a web-browser front-end using .NET which will run on Linux or Windows, so I don't see an issue with portability here. Your web server will have to be windows based but it shouldn't matter whether D3 is running on Linux or Windows at the server-end, or whether the client desktops are running Linux or Windows.
You could try TigerLogics MVSP .NET API but I do not know if it has the power to deliver based on your needs. I believe you may find mv.NET from Bluefinity could fulfill your needs. This is in my opinion the leading product on the MultiValue market for achieving the goals you have in mind. This will mean spending money of course. For this you will get a very powerful set of tools. Also, the cost of investing in a good tool could end up smaller than the cost in terms of time, effort and potential complications of trying to do this piecemeal without spending any extra money. I am sure Flashconnect would also do the job. You would have to weigh up the cost of the different options to find out which one is right for you both technically and financially.
Not knowing whether or not you have .NET in your skill-set, I don't know whether the .NET option would be easier for you. It is however technically possible.
I would suggest using Rocket's D3 (formerly TigerLogic D3) .NET APIs and create a Web API RESTful service that you can consume with JavaScript in any other web technology and if you need to call from a D3 subroutine (in case you would) then use the MVS Toolkit.
Requirements though are D3 9.0 or later.
I've used all of the technologies described, and many more to interface with D3. I agree with #Glenn and will add... I understand you're edging away from .NET. That's fine, you don't need it. But consider that most LAMP implementations separate the DBMS servers from the web servers. That topology introduces short delays between the tiers but decouples them in case you want to use multiple web servers or multiple databases - a common topology even with D3 / MV.
I have a client where we have a Java/Grails front-end over Linux, with all data queries filtered through a single, elegant data provider class that's abstracted from application logic. That uses a web service call which I wrote in Java, calling to a .NET web service. The service is easily generated/modified, as is the client from the WSDL. From there IIS carries inbound queries to D3 via mv.NET, and at this point it doesn't matter if the D3 DBMS is in Linux or Windows. My web service could have as easily been in Linux with Java but it would then lack a pooling mechanism - see below.
If you want all Linux then you can go with the MVSP Java library. TigerLogic (now acquired by Rocket Software) committed to a PHP binding for MVSP some months ago. Rather than wait, one of my clients created a PHP wrapper around mv.NET, though MVSP is as easy. So the resulting application is essentially LAMP, but with the M = Multivalue. I have written code like this too - we can write a wrapper in any language which exposes a useful API and abstracts both connectivity method and OS dependencies. In other words it doesn't matter what languages we want to use or what OS's are involved. That part is rather trivial and subject to change later. It's better to focus on the application than the communications.
You can also go off the menu, so to speak, and create your own Java/PHP wrapper around the OS-level d3tcl command, which is a script/wrapper around the d3 executable. This allows you to open a connection yourself and pass in commands.
Whatever option you select, you need to consider that opening and closing a DBMS connection is a slow process. You do not want to script a login around every data request. You do want to open a connection and keep that open persistently, while your client code accesses and releases that persistent connection as required. This is why we like mv.NET and FlashCONNECT. With MVSP and other mechanisms you need to create your own persistence model. You'll also need to manage a pool of connection resources - what happens when you get 10 simultaneous queries, or just 1 short one after one long one? You don't want queries to back up, you don't want to reject or timeout connections, and you don't want to fire up a connection for every client. You do want the proper number of DBMS sessions waiting for inbound connections. mv.NET and FlashCONNECT do this for you, the others do not.
Personally I'd shy away from FlashCONNECT. I was there for its initial development and testing and for years of end-user implementations. It's not as widely used as the other options and is more a tool for those who aren't familiar with other options. If you're talking about Java then you're probably not inclined to use FlashCONNECT. That said, if you have developers who are not familiar with anything outside D3 then FlashCONNECT is a decent server-side tool for them while someone else is focusing on the client-side with other technologies. Everyone should use their best skillset.
Finally, (already?) if someone is not familiar with external technologies, and more intimate with D3, then other options exist like DesignBAIS and Viságe, mostly removing the burden of communications and allowing developers to work on the client-side features and back-end rules in BASIC.
I discuss all of these topics plus mobile and telephony on my blog.
HTH
I want to store a lot of configuration data pertaining to cluster, process, IP addresses etc. I have worked on one such product earlier where LDAP was used for this purpose. Although it was PITA to configure it the first time, I liked the transactional LDAP part which helps in dynamic reloading of the configuration when there is a change. It can be done with a flat file using inotify, but that is not as good as transactional LDAP. But, as I said, the configuration was a real pain, and also I don't want to borrow the same idea of LDAP in this product.
So can anyone give me an idea about which will be the next best replacement, which makes entering configuration easy and also that can help in dynamic configuration and notify my process whenever there is a change in the configuration file and exactly what changed (directly or indirectly)?
I am planning to develop my product in C++ and C.
The configuration can be edited by an Admin, or if he is too lazy he can automate it using some script. Also through cli, but not by a running process, that will land me up in concurrency and locking issues.
My program is a daemon, some sort of cluster manager running on multiple nodes.
There is no wrapper provided for user to edit configuration.
I am only looking for Linux/Solaris platform.
You have not really given enough background information for a good answer to be given. So, here are some of the unasked questions, the answers to which will influence your choice:
How is the configuration file edited? By your process, or by hand-editing, or by some other program?
How is the main program running - in the foreground with a user interacting, or in the background as a daemon?
If you expect people to hand-edit the configuration, then you can provide a wrapper script for doing so which sends a signal (conventionally SIGHUP) to the daemon to tell it to reread its configuration file.
If your main program is going to guide the user through the editing, then you really don't need to tell the program when the editing is complete. It already knows.
You mention Linux in the tags; can we assume that Windows portability is not an issue?
As to configuration file formats, you can go with the vogue (and bloat) of using XML. However, although that is a good tool for programs communicating, it is not very good for people to edit. You should look at E S Raymond's "The Art of UNIX Programming" which is a good general read and has a chapter on different configuration file formats. You should probably adopt one of the schemes outlined there. Which scheme is best depends in part on what information you have to capture in your configuration file.
If you're going to embed an interpreter (Perl, Lua, Tcl/Tk, ...) into your program, you might use that language to handle the configuration file...or you might not.
Update: Albert D. Kallal has kindly started the discussion off, and to get some more opinions I'm adding a bounty.
This is a nontrivial question about maintenance of a legacy application myself and two other developers support. We are not the original developers, and the code base is 300,000 lines of MFC and business logic tightly coupled together. We don't know every single line of code 100%.
We do know the code behind the major components, and we know that it's poorly written. Our objective is to refactor the application out of 1995 and into 2010. Between the three of us there is (in aggregate) enough experience in software architecture and database design for us to fix the components that are poorly architected in code or incorrectly modelled in the database, but we don't have a lot of experience with modern reporting systems. Thus my question (once you get to the end of it...) is about reporting systems.
For anybody who reads this entire post, I am appreciative of your time. For anybody who reads this post and replies with solutions, experience (or sympathy!), I am both appreciative and thankful.
At work I have inherited the maintenance of an Access 2003 database that contains approximately 250 reports (and thousands of supporting queries) that acts as a reporting engine for our application.
The reports all have swathes of VBA in them for particular formatting or pulling extra information into the report. For this reason we are entirely locked into the Access platform, we can't use tools like BIDS to import the Access report objects without messing around to make the report display the same without VBA.
So to get ourselves out of this Access solution we need to put some time in going over every single report. Which means we're looking to pick the best longterm solution, since we're going to have to redevelop every report regardless of the platform we choose.
Furthermore our customers have a choice of Microsoft Access or SQL Server as their database. This means that all our SQL has to be written with the lowest common denominator in mind - JET SQL. We've got some wiggle room to drop support for Microsoft Access, but we'd need to build a case for it. If the best reporting system we can identify has strong support for SQL Server but little or no support for Microsoft Access this will accelerate us dropping support for Microsoft Access as a database.
The overall implementation of the report system is quite mediocre, when we want to display reports in our application we start a Microsoft Access process, find its window and reparent it to our application, strip off its window styles and then use the Access.Application COM interface to invoke some VBA that creates linked tables to the database (either a Microsoft Access MDB or a SQL Server database) and then opens up the report we want. Probably the only supported part of the process is using the public COM interfaces, the rest is an ugly hack. The other components in the application are equally underwhelming.
To "fix" our application we've got a new development plan, with development of our application split into (approximately) three parts every year.
4 months upgrading our application to support the latest government legislation in our industry
4 months delivering a new major feature
4 months "consolidation" (fixing what is broken)
We're currently at #3 now (for this year), and we really want to take advantage of the downtime to fix up the application, refactoring the major components. We have three developers, and want AppName v5.0 out at the end of 2012 (it's currently AppName v4.12). This gives us 36 months of development effort to approportion between several components (user interface, underlying database structure, reporting, etc) over the three consolidation periods we will have before then. The sum of the components that we fix will give us v5.0.
We've scoped out what we'd like to do with most of the components except for our reporting engine, and I'm posting on SO in the hope of getting some good ideas, or at least a feel for the work that's required.
I have two ideas for improving our reporting system. Both of them involve a moderate amount of work, and there is one consideration that neither solution addresses completely: in addition to the reports that we develop, our customers also have the opportunity to request bespoke development of reports. They're customer-specific, we take their Access database, augment it with their report and give it back to the customer. There's hundreds of unique reports out there - unusable if we turned the old system off. (And we have to turn the old system off eventually - we don't know how much longer we're going to be able to mess around with the Microsoft Access window to make it look like an embedded report. We already have two distinct code paths for Access 2003 and 2007. What if we can't hack up a code path for Access 2010 and all our customers have to use Access 2007?)
For both ideas, the intention is to stop supporting our current reporting system and let it run for as long as it will without maintenance. Maybe we can hack in Access 2010 and Access 2014 support, and the customer reports that were developed keep putting along for 5 more years. Over time, we'd migrate the most commonly used reports from the old Access database into their new format.
Idea 1: Microsoft.Reporting.WinForms.ReportViewer
The first idea is to write a wrapper around the ReportViewer control as a replacement reporting engine.
We'd need to move the project to C++/CLI (already on the cards), and instead of having to launch an entire process each time we needed to view a report we could simply instantiate this control. A bonus of this that the RDLC files that contain the reports are much easier to version control in Subversion than the Access 2003 database we currently have (we use Visual SourceSafe because the tools to integrate SVN with Access don't work well with the size of our Access database). The visual designer for RDLC files is also nicely integrated into Visual Studio.
This is more of an evolutionary rather than revolutionary change to the way we do reports, the ReportViewer control will take an RDLC file that has the report layout, and our application will take care of querying the data. Because our database might be SQL Server or Microsoft Access, we still have to write simple JET SQL. We're gaining better reporting (drill down looks nice), stronger authoring tools and easier version control, but is this worth the effort?
Idea 2: SQL Server Reporting Services and SharePoint 2010 with Access Services
The second idea is to kill Access as a database platform and migrate all our customers to SQL Server (we have hosted instances of our application for those customers who don't have the skill set to set up their own SQL Server instances). Once they're migrated we would use SQL Server Reporting Services as the reporting engine, with the ReportViewer control in server rendering mode.
In addition to SQL Server Reporting Services, I am curious as to whether SharePoint 2010 with Access Services could be used to rapidly migrate existing Access reports into a more manageable format. We'd take the Access report that the customer uses, convert it to an Access Web Report then make it available for them on a SharePoint site. This would only be for our hosted customers, but if we find a way to deal quickly massage the VBA out of customer reports we could churn through the several hundred custom reports our customers have.
I'm also interested in the ability to use an Access Web Navigation Form to act as a portal to all our reports. We'd host a web browser control inside our application which would give customers access to their own reports and to our standard suite.
We'd get all the benefits of Idea #1 plus the ability to write in full Transact SQL, a reports portal, and (hopefully) a reasonable upgrade path for customer's proprietary reports.
So, my question is: am I going about this the right way? Are these viable solutions for modern reporting systems, or laughable? We have a strong preference for using the ReportViewer control either in client rendering mode where our application processes the data, or in server rendering mode in conjunction with SQL Server - but are there reporting systems like Crystal Reports which offer better reporting and better migration paths for our legacy Access reports?
If you had up to 36 months of developer time, how would you do this?
Well, ok, no one else jumping in, I give this a go.
Quite interesting how you talking about a report writer that 15+ years old. Back then the Access report writer was beyond state of the art. It was a country mile ahead of everything else in the industry. Even today a lot of competing report writers don't have the concept of sub reports that allows modeling of relational data without having to resort to code or even SQL. Then, throw in programmable VBA, then the result is something that's very unique and powerful.
For access 2007, the report writer received some more nice upgrades in terms of layout controls but that going to be of little help here.
And, for 2010 we can now display reports in a sub-form control. This feature was added to facilitate use of the new access navigation control. Access 2010 has a new web browser control (works in forms or reports), and there also a new navigation control. Your post hints that the new navigation control and the web control are somehow related to each other but they completely different features.
Both the new web browser control, and navigation control can be used in both web appliations or 100% client only applications. The navigation control is nice since you can build that nav contorl by drag and dropping reports onto the nav control to build up a up a list of reports to choose from (it is slick and easy and nice). And with this navigation control, we can actually build some nice drill down type of interfaces for reports.
As you noted for access 2010 we now have web publishing of access reports and this feature is based on SQL server reporting services (they are RDL reports). However, two important issues here is no VBA is allowed inside of the web reports. And, I also point out that there is no automatic conversion utility that is built into access that will convert existing reports into web based reports. So to build a report that's going to be designated and published to the web, you have to choose specifically to create a web report to accomplish this goal. So this answers and clears up one question of yours of will this help you convert existing reports to SQL server, and the answer is no. So, Access will not help you convert existing reports to web based RDL reports (As noted, Access uses RDL and sql reporting for those web reports - those reports also render in the access client side without conversion).
Access has a great path for web based reports via SharePoint and also Access Web is coming to Office 365. However, keep in mind this ability is not going to help much with the existing reports that you have.
In fact one of the things I would be looking at if you're going to use winforms report viewer is the change in where that existing VBA report code will be moved to? You not really mentioned this issue. As noted one really interesting and great feature of those reports is that imbedded VBA code. Often that VBA will have been used because SQL and something like RDL will NOT work because neither of those languages (sql, and RDL) are procedural code.
I can't stress how important this concept is. So, this quite much means any report writer replacements means that code will now have to be OUTSIDE of the reports and moved into your application. So, keep this issue in mind as now when you issue new reports, you also be issuing new procedural code that NOT be contained in those reports. This code will have to become part of your application (so, to issue new reports, you will thus also be issusing a new version of your software).
You are not likely to find much that allows procedural code to be imbedded inside the report like you can with access. So, that report code and logic will now have to be built and maintained within your main application and outside of the reports.
At the end of the day, I should point out the old adage if it ain't broke, then don't change it. Access been around for a very long time, but we seen significant investments from the folks in Redmond into this product during the last few years, so it shows no signs of dying anytime soon.
So, one possible suggestion is to keep the status quo, and continue going the way it works now. I mean you stated that you have to continue supporting JET for this anyway so you not getting away from having to use a major part of Access anyway. So, you continue to have to use JET engine anyway. So, you just dumping the report side and you still have use the JET data engine anyway.
However, assuming this decision's been made, I can't really suggest what report writer you should replace the access one with. Obviously considerations for the next report writer should have a seamless path to web even if they are NOW going to be rendered on the desktop. It makes no sense to make a large investment today without web considerations in some fashion.
I do think SQL server reporting services is a good choice due to the web ability. And, as an access developer we also have the option to create web based reports but they also render perfect in the access client on the desktop side (and this works when you have no server and no conversion issues exist when publishing these reports to the web, or using them local on the client). So, even if you don't use access, do choose something that allows reports to render both desktop and web like access 2010 allows.
I would consider building the report system around some .net tools. This would likely not play too well as an embedded report system inside of your existing application, but it would allow you to issue new reports, and you would not have to touch your existing code base for each new report issued. This issuing of new reports that have procedural code needs to be resolved. You likely can now issue new reports without having to modify the main application because those reports can contain code inside. I would be looking to use something that would allow new reports to be built and issued but you not having to issue new edition of your main software. You might not embeed the code in the reports anymore, but you need to palce it somewhere, and hopefully outside of your main application.
Wow, this is a great question and Albert has given you a teriffic answer.
Unfortunately I do not believe there are any magic bullets to solve your problem. I have used Microsoft Access since it's first version, and always felt it's strongest feature was as a report generator, particulary when used with SQL Server. As you undoubtably know, one can often have issues with corrupted Access databases in a multi-user environment and SQL Server addresses that issue very nicely.
To my way of thinking the biggest problem with Access is that Microsoft brought out managed code (.Net) ten years ago now but Access is still a native application. In an ideal world Microsoft would rewrite Access in C# using all the latest features such as improved support for multiple processors etc. Unfortunately I do not expect this to happen any time soon.
Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) was definately far abead of "state of the art" when it was introduced, but today I believe most would agree that coding in VB.Net with Visual Studio is much more productive than continuing to develop in VBA.
SInce the selection of a new report generator is something you will need to live with for several years, perhaps it would be helpful to consider what an "ideal" report generator for the next ten years should look like?
Personally I would want:
1) All the great graphics and ease of skinning and branding that Silverlight provides.
2) Great multiprocessor support (you must have noticed how the UI thread in Access often appears "unresponsive" when running long queries or reports).
3) Support for lots of devices such as cellphones, iPads etc. While today the desktop and web dominate, these are becoming increasingly important (unless for some particular reason they are not important to your customers going forward).
4) Support for modern programming practices such as test driven development, dependency injection etc.
Please do let us know what you decide upon.
This is a long shot, but is there a possibility of using Access to generate a saved PDF and displaying that in your app in a PDF-viewing control that is part of your app, rather than external? Or export to XML or something (I haven't a clue what XML export options are available for reports in recent versions of Access, if any)?
The point is that you'd not have to rewrite the Access reporting logic, but you'd have eliminated the fake embedding and replaced it with something that's really embedded in your application.
What you'd be giving up is the perhaps the options that the Access UI gives the user, but I'm not sure how useful that is (I'd tend to not want those options available!).
Also, you'd be persisting the reports to disk, but I'm not sure this is much of any kind of significant issue, either, but it would entirely depend on the context (I'm assuming you have no 1000-page reports with heavy graphics, etc.).
You could take a look at ActiveReports by Data Dynamics. We use it within our apps for paperwork type reports (eg, invoices) and it's extremely flexible, far more so than what you can achieve with the MS reporting tools. For reports that are genuine reports rather than paperwork we use reporting services. It's been a while since I had to port an access report to active reports, but there is little or nothing you could do in access that you can't do in active reports. I'm also fairly certain that it has a decent tool for import access reports. There's a fully functional evaluation version available for download, which, unless they've changed things, just printes a watermark in the report footer rather than expires after a fixed evaluation period. Well worth a look, I'd say - Here's a link to their site
I won't get into any specifics since I'm not a Microsoft developer, but I can answer on how to integrate a legacy product into the current or new product. As for the 36-month question, see the end of this answer.
Usage Requirements - how do you intend to use the legacy code in the context of your new code?
Identify Use Cases - drill down into usage and create a use case for each transaction between the new and old code.
Identify I/O - drill down into each use case and identify I/O requirements
Write Tests - for each I/O pair, write tests to determine the best way to handle that I/O pair.
Reuse - reuse your tests to create a wrapper/API for the legacy code.
Future - as you replace legacy code with new code, let it match your wrapper/API so you can keep refactoring to a minimum.
If I had 36 months of development time to spend, I would spend 3-6 months writing a wrapper/API and then replace each unit tested I/O pair with new code every 7-10 days utilizing sprints (scrum/agile).
For the data store, I would absolutely move from Access to some SQL server product and prioritize that requirement for the new code.
I've used Crystal, Access (2 - 2007), SQL Reporting and now DevExpress and am very happy with DevExpress's reporting engine. It is specific to .net, but can be utilized by Windows Forms, ASP.net Web pages, WPF and Silverlight. If you are willing to utilize some .net controls, I highly recomend it. It can use just about anything as a datasource and is very flexible. My current projects aren't as complex as some things I have done in the past, but I would venture to say that I would rather do complex reports using the DX engine over any other I have used.
They have an End User designer that includes scripting capabiliities and DX is actively adding functionality.
I would recommend taking a look at: http://devexpress.com/Products/Index/Reporting.xml
Is there a relatively easy way to display the output of a C++ program on a webpage? And I don't mean manually, in other words, you see it on a webpage as it runs not as in I make a code tag and write it in myself.
EDIT: Just so everybody can get this clear I am going to post this up here. I am NOT trying to make a webpage in C++. Please excuse me if this sounds spiteful or anything but I am getting a lot of answers relating to that.
Step one, get yourself a server-side language. Be that PHP, ASP, Python, Ruby, whatever. Get it set up so you can serve it.
Step two, find your language's exec equivalent. Practically all of them have them. It'll let you run a command as if it were from the command line, usually with arguments and capture the output. Here's PHP's:
http://php.net/manual/en/function.exec.php
Of course, if you're passing user-input as arguments, sanitise!
I've just seen that you accepted Scott's answer. I usually wouldn't chase up a SO thread so persistently but I fear you're about to make a mistake that you'll come to regret down the line. Giving direct access to your program and its own built-in server is a terrible idea for two reasons:
You waste a day implementing this built-in server and then getting it to persist and testing it
More importantly, you've just opened up another attack vector into your server. When it comes to security, keep it simple.
You're far better having your C++ app running behind another (mature) server side language as all the work is done for you and it can filter the input to keep things safe.
You could write a CGI app in C++, or you could use an existing web server language to execute the command and send the output to the client.
You want to use Witty.
Wt (pronounced 'witty') is a C++
library for developing interactive web
applications.
The API is widget-centric and similar
to desktop GUI APIs. To the developer,
it offers complete abstraction of any
web-specific implementation details,
including event handling, graphics
support, graceful degradation (or
progressive enhancement), and pretty
URLs.
Unlike many page-based frameworks, Wt
was designed for creating stateful
applications that are at the same time
highly interactive (leveraging
techinques such as AJAX to their
fullest) and accessible (supporting
plain HTML browsers), using automatic
graceful degradation or progressive
enhancement.
The library comes with an application
server that acts as a stand-alone web
server or integrates through FastCGI
with other web servers.
I am not sure this is what you are looking for but you may want CGI You may want to look at this SO question, C++ may not be the best language for what you want to do.
based off the questions you posted Writing a web app like what you want is no simple task. What I would recommend is use some other library (this is one i found with a quick google) to get a web console on your server and give the user it is running under execute deny permissions on every folder except the folder you have your app installed.
This is still is a risky method if you don't set up the security correctly but it is the easiest solution without digging around too much on existing libraries to just have the application interactive.
EDIT --
The "Best" solution is learn AJAX and have your program post its own pages with it but like I said, it will not be easy.
It sounds like you want something like a telnet session embedded in a webpage. A quick google turns up many Java telnet apps, though I'm not qualified to evaluate which would be most ideal to embed in html.
You would set up the login script on the host machine to run your c++ app and the user would interact with it through the shell window. Note though that this will only work for pure command line apps. If you want to use a GUI app in this way, then you should look into remote desktop software or VNC.
It may be worth looking into Adobe's "Alchemy" project on Adobe Labs
This may help you with what you're trying to achieve.
:)
Are you looking for something like what codepad.org does? I believe they explain how they did it here.
There is a library called C++ Server Pages - Poco. I used it for one of my college project, its pretty good. There is also good documentation to get started with, u can find it here http://pocoproject.org/docs/