I am currently using Visual Studio 2013 (Update 4) for building Qt5.4.0 projects. I use the express version so I don't use the VS plugin. My .vcxproj files a generated from .pro files using build scripts and qmake.
When debugging my projects I sometimes try to step into Qt library code. To do this I added the path to the Qt source codes to the solution properties->Debug Source Files setting like described in a former post (VS2013 debugger can not find Qt sources).
Because I have many different projects and it would be a pain to update all of them in case of a Qt update I used a system environment variable "QTSRC" pointing to that path and added the following line to the solution:
$(QTSRC)
This worked like charm some time ago (with an older update of VS and a former Qt version 5.x).
But unfortunately it does not work anymore. It seems that VS now totally ignores the system environment variable (it also does not show any errors when I check the "check entries" button in the dialog).
Does anybody know what changed here lately and what must be done to fix this? It would be very annoying to add the path hardcoded to every project (which still works) and have to do this over and over again after Qt updates.
I'd look at the Property Pages which will allow you to set user defined values that you can share across different projects:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/675f1588.aspx
I use them to set global include paths, but it looks like you can set almost anything there. Set things in the .User pages if you want them used for all your projects but not included in the solution or project file itself.
A good, short, guide is here:
http://www.curlybrace.com/words/2012/12/17/setting-global-c-include-paths-in-visual-studio-2012-and-2011-and-2010/
Related
I just installed Qt creator (for the 10th time probably), and even when I follow the simple steps to create a new Qt Widget or Qt Console applications, I get this error. Extremely frustrated with various Qt Creator bugs. Help will be appreciate.
If you look closely at your workspace, you can see, that there are two projects. One project is called Sample, one project is called Widget. The active project is "Sample". You can tell that from the project browser as the Sample project is in bold letters. So building and debugging applies only to the Sample project.
The open file where you set your breakpoints in is "Widget/main.cpp", it belongs to the other non-active "Widget" project. So when you start the debugger, the environment warns you that this will not work. Completely correct behaviour.
Maybe try the following:
1- Ensure case sensitive typing of the file name and type the full path not just the name.
2- Delete configuration files that are automatically created.
3- Make sure the QT environment is setup correctly pointing to the required compilers, packages and resources.
4- Check if there are any missing environment variables on your machine.
The problem could be in the .pro
Check that you have the file into the source in the .pro
Historical context:
We have a project consisting of following parts:
Host application (C++)
Scripting Engine library (also written in C++)
A lot of C++ plugins (around 30+)
A lot of scripts that tie all the stuff together...
From version to version some plugins are added and some are removed.
Till now we used Visual Studio solution (*.sln) to contain all the projects (*.vcxproj) for Host application, Scripting Engine library and plugins (one *.vcxproj per plugin!).
To share sources/projects we use proprietary source control system, and till now once we merged updates from the server (some plugin projects are added and some plugin projects are removed) all the project tree in the VS were refreshed thanks to "reload" feature (no action was required from developer to see and build updated source tree).
The problem:
Now our senior management decided to switch to Eclipse CDT/MinGW pair and we faced the issue that Eclipse Workspace is not the same thing as Visual Studio *.sln ...
Now when some plugin project folder appears or some plugin project folders disappears corresponding workspace items do not update accordingly.
Thus from now every developer has to use File>Import...>General>"Existing projects into workspace" File/"Open Projects from File System" to add new projects to own Workspace manually once they were added by other developer to the source control.
Also one has to manually remove from own Workspace those plugin projects that were deleted from source control...
This is a great contrast with what we previously had with Visual Studio where "reload" feature automatically updated project/source tree (just bacause all the information arrived with *.sln/*.vcxproj from server).
Our first option was to place Workspace\.metadata etc stuff to source control (as we previously did for *.sln files) but "that is not the way how Eclipse Workspace is designed to be used" (this is even not possible just because paths in .metadata\* are absolute and tons of Workspace\* stuff it is not mergeable at all)
Question:
Is there some way to automatically syncronize Eclipse CDT Workspace with project set obtained from source control. Like just press some (hidden?) magic "refresh" button (in special plugin to install or something like that) and all the new projects will be automatically added to the source tree in the Workspace and deleted projects will also disappear automatically, wothout need to use all those "Import" wizards, and withot need to remove deleted projects manually?
May be there is a special "Container" project type in Eclipse to play the same role as *.sln did in Visual Studio or something like that?
May be other options available?... Overall intention is not in replacing *.sln by some Eclipse equivalent but to support similar workflow when bunch of plugin projects is managed as a whole and project set "refresh" to be simple operation that does not require from each person in the team to manually track projects appeared/disappeared in that set.
Have you looked at using CMake to generate the Eclipse project files? You can then import those into an Eclipse workspace.
Its not automatic, but if you create separate CMakeLists.txt files for each part, then you can easily comment the include of that part in the main CMakeLists.txt file and regenerate the project files when you only want to load subset of the project.
https://cmake.org/Wiki/Eclipse_CDT4_Generator
Should you ever want to change back to VS or to another IDE CMake can generate project files for that too.
I've personally only used CMake to generate VS-solutions and Unix make files so I can't vouch for how well this works.
HTH.
On side note, why did management decide that Eclipse should be used instead of Visual Studio? It sounds like a poor decision without factual grounds or impact research prior to the decision being made.
Was it because Eclipse is free? Did they consider what reduced developer productivity costs?
I am trying to import an existing c++ application's source into visual studio to take advantage of some specific MS tools. However, after searching online and playing with visual studio, I cannot seem to find an easy way to import existing c++ source code into visual studio and keep it structurally intact.
The import capacity I did find flattens out the directories and puts them all into one project. Am I missing something?
(This is all unmanaged C++, and contains specific builds for win/unix)
With no project/solution loaded, in Visual Studio 2005 I see this menu item:
File > New Project From Existing Code...
After following the wizard, my problem is solved!
Switching the "Show All Files" button shows the complete hierarchy with all directories and files within.
If the New Project From Existing Code... option isn't available, you'll need to add it in Tools > Customize...
I am not aware of any general solution under the constraints given - specifically having to create many projects from a source tree.
The best option I see is actually creating the project files by some script.
Creating a single project manually (create empty project, then add the files),
Configure it as close as possible as desired (i.e. with precompiled headers, build configurations, etc.)
Use the .vcproj created as skeleton for the project files to be created
A very simple method would file list, project name etc. with "strange tokens", and fill them in with your generator. If you want to be the good guy, you can of course use some XML handling library.
Our experience: We actually don't store the .vcproj and .sln in the repository (git) anymore, but a python script that re-genrates them from the source tree, together with VS 2008 "property sheet templates" (or whatever they are called). This helps a lot making general adjustments.
The project generation script contains information about all the projects specialties (e.g. do they use MFC/ATL, will it create DLL or an EXE, files to exclude).
In addition, this script also contains dependencies, which feeds the actual build script.
This works quite well, the problems are minor: python requried in build systems, not forgetting to re-gen the project files, me having to learn some python to make adjustments to some projects.
#Michael Burr "How complex are the python scripts and whatever supporting 'templates' you might need?"
I honestly can't tell, since I gave the task to another dev (who picked python). The original task was to provide a build script, as the VS2008 solution build was not good enough for our needs, and the old batch file didn't support parallelization. .vcproj generation was added later. As I understand his script generates the .vcproj and .sln files from scratch, but pulls in all the settings from separate property sheets.
Pros:
Adding new configurations on the fly. Some of the projects already had six configurations, and planning for unicode support meant considering doubling them for a while. Some awkward tools still build as MBCS, so some libs do have 8 configs now. Configuring that from hand is a pain, now it just doesn't bother me anymore.
Global changes, e.g. moving around relative project paths, the folder for temp files and for final binaries until we found a solution we were happy with
Build Stability. Merging VC6 project files was a notable source of errors for various reasons, and VC9 project files didn't look better. Now things seem isolated better: compile/link settings in the property sheets, file handling in the script. Also, the script mostly lists variations from our default, ending up easier to read than a project file.
Generally: I don't see a big benefit when your projects are already set up, they are rather stable, and you don't have real issues. However, when moving into the unknown (for us: mostly VC6 -> VC9 and Unicode builds), the flexibility reduced the risk of experiments greatly.
Create a new empty solution and add your source code to it.
For example,
File>New>Project...
Visual C++>Win32>Win32 Console Application
Application Settings>
- Uncheck "Precompiled Header"
- Check "Empty Project"
Project is then created. To add existing code:
Project>Add Existing Item...>
- Select file(s) to add
Recompile, done!
In the "Solution Explorer" you can click on the "Show All Files" button to have Visual Studio display the files as they exist on the file system (directories and all).
In my opinion this is an imperfect workaround, but I believe it's the best available. I'm unaware of a plug-in, macro or other tool that'll import a directory into an actual project with folders that mirror the file system's.
I know this question is already marked correct, but I was able to import existing code into a project with Visual Studio 2008 by doing "File" -> "New Project from existing code". The directory structure of my code was retained.
You can always switch view from project menu
For eg. Project->Show All Files
The above will display the files in unformated raw file system order
Not sure of older versions but it works on VS 2010
I understand you, I have the same problem: many .cpp and .h files organized in many folders and subfolders with include paths written for this folder structure. The only way you can do to import this folder structure together with the source files is to use "Show All Files" and then right-click on folders and select "Import in Project". This works for me when I am using C-Sharp projects. But it does not work for my C++ Projects. I am still searching for a solution...
I have a number of native C++ libraries (Win32, without MFC) compiling under Visual Studio 2005, and used in a number of solutions.
I'd like to be able to choose to compile and link them as either static libraries or DLLs, depending on the needs of the particular solution in which I'm using them.
What's the best way to do this? I've considered these approaches:
1. Multiple project files
Example: "foo_static.vcproj" vs "foo_dll.vcproj"
Pro: easy to generate for new libraries, not too much manual vcproj munging.
Con: settings, file lists, etc. in two places get out of sync too easily.
2. Single project file, multiple configurations
Example: "Debug | Win32" vs "Debug DLL | Win32", etc.
Pro: file lists are easier to keep in sync; compilation options are somewhat easier to keep in sync
Con: I build for both Win32 and Smart Device targets, so I already have multiple configurations; I don't want to make my combinatorial explosion worse ("Static library for FooPhone | WinMobile 6", "Dynamic library for FooPhone | WinMobile 6", "Static library for BarPda | WinMobile 6", etc.
Worse Con: VS 2005 has a bad habit of assuming that if you have a configuration defined for platform "Foo", then you really need it for all other platforms in your solution, and haphazardly inserts all permutations of configuration/platform configurations all over the affected vcproj files, whether valid or not. (Bug filed with MS; closed as WONTFIX.)
3. Single project file, selecting static or dynamic via vsprops files
Example: store the appropriate vcproj fragments in property sheet files, then apply the "FooApp Static Library" property sheet to config/platform combinations when you want static libs, and apply the "FooApp DLL" property sheet when you want DLLs.
Pros: This is what I really want to do!
Cons: It doesn't seem possible. It seems that the .vcproj attribute that switches between static and dynamic libraries (the ConfigurationType attribute of the Configuration element) isn't overrideable by the .vsprops file. Microsoft's published schema for these files lists only <Tool> and <UserMacro> elements.
EDIT: In case someone suggests it, I've also tried a more "clever" version of #3, in which I define a .vsprops containing a UserMacro called "ModuleConfigurationType" with a value of either "2" (DLL) or "4" (static library), and changed the configuration in the .vcproj to have ConfigurationType="$(ModuleConfigurationType)". Visual Studio silently and without warning removes the attribute and replaces it with ConfigurationType="1". So helpful!
Am I missing a better solution?
I may have missed something, but why can't you define the DLL project with no files, and just have it link the lib created by the other project?
And, with respect to settings, you can factor them out in vsprop files...
There is an easy way to create both static and dll lib versions in one project.
Create your dll project. Then do the following to it:
Simply create an nmake makefile or .bat file that runs the lib tool.
Basically, this is just this:
lib /NOLOGO /OUT:<your_lib_pathname> #<<
<list_all_of_your_obj_paths_here>
<<
Then, in your project, add a Post Build Event where the command just runs the .bat file (or nmake or perl). Then, you will always get both a dll and a static lib.
I'll refrain from denigrating visual studio for not allowing the tool for this to exist in a project just before Linker (in the tool flow).
I think the typical way this is done is choice 2 above. It is what I use and what I have seen done by a number of libraries and companies.
If you find it does not work for you then by all means use something else.
Good luck.
I prefer 2 configurations way.
Setup all common settings via 'All configurations' item in a project properties windows. After it separated settings. And it's done. Let's go coding.
Also there is very good feature named 'Batch build', which builds specified configurations by turn.
Multiple projects are the best way to go - this is the configuration i have most widely seen in umpteen no of projects that i have come across.
That said, it might be also possible to implement the third option by modifying your vcproj files on the fly from external tools(like a custom vbscript), that you could invoke from a make file. You can use shell variables to control the behavior of the tool.
Note that you should still use use visual studio to make the build, the makefile should only launch your external tool if required to make the mods and then follow that by the actual build command
I use Visual Studio 6.0 (Still) due to issues that are preventing us from Migrating to VS2005 or newer. Rebuilding causes severe issues (everything breaks)... so many of us are considering lobbying a migration to GnuC++ moving forward in a structured way to eventually get us off of licensed Visual Studio products and onto Eclipse and Linux.
In Unix/Linux it is easy to build for all configurations.. so I can't believe what a time and productivity sink it is to try and accomplish the same task in Visual Studio. For VS6.0 I have so far found that only having two separate projects seems to be workable. I haven't yet tried the multiple configuration technique, but will see if it works in the older VS6.0.
Why not go for version 1 and generate the second set of project files from the first using a script or something. That way you know that the differences are JUST the pieces required to build a dll or static lib.
I have a few things that I cannot find a good way to perform in Visual Studio:
Pre-build step invokes a code generator that generates some source files which are later compiled. This can be solved to a limited extent by adding blank files to the project (which are later replaced with real generated files), but it does not work if I don't know names and/or the number of auto-generated source files. I can easily solve it in GNU make using $(wildcard generated/*.c). How can I do something similar with Visual Studio?
Can I prevent pre-build/post-build event running if the files do not need to be modified ("make" behaviour)? The current workaround is to write a wrapper script that will check timestamps for me, which works, but is a bit clunky.
What is a good way to locate external libraries and headers installed outside of VS? In *nix case, they would normally be installed in the system paths, or located with autoconf. I suppose I can specify paths with user-defined macros in project settings, but where is a good place to put these macros so they can be easily found and adjusted?
Just to be clear, I am aware that better Windows build systems exist (CMake, SCons), but they usually generate VS project files themselves, and I need to integrate this project into existing VS build system, so it is desirable that I have just plain VS project files, not generated ones.
If you need make behavior and are used to it, you can create visual studio makefile projects and include them in your project.
If you want less clunky, you can write visual studio macros and custom build events and tie them to specific build callbacks / hooks.
You can try something like workspacewhiz which will let you setup environment variables for your project, in a file format that can be checked in. Then users can alter them locally.
I've gone through this exact problem and I did get it working using Custom Build Rules.
But it was always a pain and worked poorly. I abandoned visual studio and went with a Makefile system using cygwin. Much better now.
cl.exe is the name of the VS compiler.
Update: I recently switched to using cmake, which comes with its own problems, and cmake can generate a visual studio solution. This seems to work well.
Specifically for #3, I use property pages to designate 3rd party library location settings (include paths, link paths, etc.). You can use User Macros from a parent or higher level property sheet to designate the starting point for the libraries themselves (if they are in a common root location), and then define individual sheets for each library using the base path macro. It's not automatic, but it is easy to maintain, and every developer can have a different root directory if necessary (it is in our environment).
One downside of this approach is that the include paths constructed this way are not included in the search paths for Visual Studio (unless you duplicate the definitions in the Projects and Directories settings for VS). I spoke to some MS people at PDC08 about getting this fixed for VS2010, and improving the interface in general, but no solid promises from them.
(1). I don't know a simple answer to this, but there are workarounds:
1a. If content of generated files does not clash (i.e. there is no common static identifiers etc.), you can add to the project a single file, such as AllGeneratedFiles.c, and modify your generator to append a #include "generated/file.c" to this file when it produces generated/file.c.
1b. Or you can create a separate makefile-based project for generated files and build them using nmake.
(2). Use a custom build rule instead of post-build event. You can add a custom build rule by right-clicking on the project name in the Solution Explorer and selecting Custom Build Rules.
(3). There is no standard way of doing this; it has to be defined on a per-project basis. One approach is to use environment variables to locate external dependencies. You can then use those environment variables in project properties. Add a readme.txt describing required tools and libraries and corresponding environment variables which the user has to set, and it should be easy enough for anyone to set up.
Depending on exactly what you are trying to do, you can sometimes have some luck with using a custom build step and setting your dependencies properly. It may be helpful to put all the generated code into its own project and then have your main project depend on it.