How to run c++ applications in android using cygwin. Any tutorial in this regard is appreciated..
You cannot directly run C++ applications in Android.
Android can run only applications written using the Android SDK, but yes you can re-use your native(C/C++) libraries for Android.
You will have to recompile all the native libraries specifically for Android. And you do need the source code for all 3rd party native libs you plan to use simply because Usually when we compile and link these libraries outside Android they are linked to glibc but unfortunately Android doesn't use glibc due to liscence and performance issues. Android uses a watered down version of glibc called libc. It has matching symbol names to glibc for most of the usual functionalities. But as far as i know the libc doesn't have some functionality related to Strings and it definitely doesnt have some posix support. If your native libraries are using any of the deprecated functionality you will have to find workaround for those by using alternative functionality supported by libc and coding your libs accordingly.
Also, you will have to use the NDK to interface Java(Android app/fwk) to native world(C++). And then write a Android application on top of that.
Though this sounds pretty simple in my experience compiling native libraries on Android(Android porting) has traditionally been very time consuming with no guarantee of sucesses.
You will want the Java Native Interface, or "JNI".
See: "Java Native Interface Wiki" "Android JNI Tips" and links therein. It is some work to get this going and to get used to how it goes. I managed it from the references given here with C and it will work out after some time and faith without further help if you follow all the steps.
Related
I would like to make c++ that will work both on Linux and windows as I understand if I use the win32 template in visual studio then it will only work on windows is there something built into c++ like java's jframe that I can use. Also I would like to use any external library at this time.
Here are some cross platform alternatives QT, wxWidgets, Ultimate++. I have used QT, it is intuitive with a huge collection of tools to use in your code. The others are also popular but I have never used them.
I make used of wxWidgets due to it's cross platform and even cross architecture, native look on the OS where it appear. Binary application yields by wxWidgets is small enough thus make it possible to linking statically as portable application. Qt produce huge binary if linked statically (and may be violate qt licensing scheme).
Another reason are licensing flexibly, well documentation and supported by huge community arround the world. wx is considered as mature framework since it first release about 20yrs ago. It's use standard C++ syntax and preprocessor that will make you easily switch from plain C or C++. Complete library are available ranging from appeal window GUI, string, network, stream, webview, xml, and wx is playing very well with 3rd party library as such database SOCI, Asio, etc ....
You may try start to code with wxWidgets easily using Eclipse-IDE and wxFormBuilder as GUI designer. Plese check my experience for ease setup it's IDE+Toolchain. This wx installer can be used do develop, test and run wx application on Linux desktop, and then deploy the binary on Raspberry Pi is available for another board target beside Linux x86_64.
http://yasriady.blogspot.co.id/2016/01/raspberry-pi-toolchain.html
There is a cross-platform application & UI development framework called Qt. I think it meets your requirements. Click here for more info.
There is a long list of both active and dead cross-platform C++ UI libraries here: https://philippegroarke.com/posts/2018/c++_ui_solutions/
I want to make a C++ program with Graphical User Interface, to be running on Windows platforms.
I want it to be independent from any libraries like .NET.
The reason I want this is because I want this program to be able to run everywhere, in every version of Windows (XP, VISTA, 7 - 32 & 64bit) without the user to be bound to have already installed a library like .NET.
Also, I want it to be portable: the whole program to consist from only one exe file.
So to summarize:
How can I make an one-exe-file GUI C++ program, able to run on all versions of Windows, without the need of pre-installed libraries on Windows from the user that uses it?
I have already MS Visual C++ 2010 Express and Eclipse with Cygwin's G++ compiler installed on my system.
Notice: I don't mind to use any libraries for windows GUI design if there is a way to embed them inside the executable file of the program.
You can either use a library that can be statically linked (MFC, WTL) or use Win32 API directly.
WxWidgets have static linking capability, never tried it myself.
If you want portabiliy, and yet don't want to depend on 3rd party libraries... well you'll have to provide portability yourself! Don't do it! As adviced by OneOfOne, use Qt and be impressed how simple yet powerful it is. Good luck!
You can also use Qt5, works great on windows and when you figure out that windows isn't the only OS out there, you can easily port it to everything else.
License issues : Proprietary Source code + LGPL Source code
I have a C++ eclipse project that I would like to easily compile In Windows and OSX.
The project is currently using an automatically generated makefile.
The libraries that I need vary depending on the platform.
In osx I'm using the CoreMidi, CoreAudio, and CoreFoundation frameworks.
In Windows I'm using the winmm.lib and multithreaded libraries.
What's the simplest way to link different libraries/frameworks depending on the current platform?
I'm currently using the gcc toolchain on OSX. Should I start using the cross compile toolchain?
Should I have two projects. One for working in windows, and one for osx, checking them both in to version control?
Should I write a custom makefile instead of using the automatically generated option that has different g++ arguments depending on the platform?
I personally had the same goal for a project and came to the conclusion the Qt framework was the best thing for me. It handles multiple languages, unicode strings, XML, network communications, native looking user interfaces, console applications: it can do an AWFUL lot.
However, as Paul pointed out, you really have to plan it from the start.
Qt does a good job of abstracting the platform away (in a module called QtCore) allowing you to write vanilla C++ code, or you can chose to include some Qt C++ language extensions which a Qt helper application called the moc (meta object compiler) creates vanilla C++ from, which can then be compiled by most common C++ compilers.
It also has a nifty cross-platform makefile generator called qmake which works on project files to create normal make files for the platform its running on.
Off the top of my head at least Windows XP & 7, OSX 10.4, 10.5, 10.6 are supported currently. But note that OSX Lion is (as of writing) not officially supported but I suspect it will be in the next release.
Based on your description, I am not sure you can easily make it cross-platform. Even without using third-party library, you have to provide separate code for osx and windows. Most of time, they design the system as cross-platform first. It's really hard to make an existing project on single-platform to cross-one. If you have the cross-platform requirement, you'd better design in that way first and rewrite from scratch.
Even though Eclipse can run fine on both OS X and Windows, it is not designed to be used in this way.
The best way to do it is to use separate IDE projects for each platform. This this is the easiest way to have unique compilation settings for multiple platforms.
Yes, you can use two eclipse projects. Alternatively, it's not unusual to have a X-Code project for OSX, and a Visual Studio Project for MS Windows.
Has anyone been able to use Boost in a windows mobile 6.x app? More specifically I want to use Thunk32 for creating a callback to a Non-static Member Function. But it uses some complicated Boost casting methods that will not compile under mobile projects.
Windows Mobile has a crippled implementation of the standard library. You will have to use a more complete version. I personally use STLPort. Using that, most of Boost will work fine. I do still have trouble using some of the libraries that are not header-only, though.
Also, that Thunk32 library you pointed to will probably need to be modified for ARM. The assembly code used is x86.
-PaulH
Native exe!
that means my program can run easily without any requirement?
even if I use .net classes?
You know I want to write a program that is so light and I don't like to use C# or any other .net programing language because all of them need .net-framework 4.5.
Just think a 2.5 MB programm needs a +250 MB .netframework.
New Update - 12/01/2016:
It's almost 4 years ago when I asked this question. As you know Dotnet Native is announced. It's an interesting feature which compile IL into native code.
Compiling Apps with .NET Native
.NET Native is a precompilation technology for building and deploying
Windows apps that is included with Visual Studio 2015. It
automatically compiles the release version of apps that are written in
managed code (C# or Visual Basic) and that target the .NET Framework
and Windows 10 to native code. Typically, apps that target the .NET
Framework are compiled to intermediate language (IL). At run time, the
just-in-time (JIT) compiler translates the IL to native code. In
contrast, .NET Native compiles Windows apps directly to native code.
For developers, this means:
Your apps will provide the superior performance of native code.
You can continue to program in C# or Visual Basic.
You can continue to take advantage of the resources provided by the .NET Framework, including its class library, automatic memory
management and garbage collection, and exception handling.
Last I checked none of the .NET frameworks were 250+ MB! Yes, the offline installer for .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 is 231MB but it contains x86 and x64 versions of .NET 2, 3 and 3.5 sp1.
You should read this http://www.smallestdotnet.com for details on sizes of various versions of the installers.
Now on to your question:
Yes, It is a little annoying to have your clients install a big framework, even 20-40MB does get annoying. With .NET, the advantage is the ease of programming (In my opionion) compared to other Native options.
Your native options are:
MFC - You need only the VS runtimes installed, which is 1-2MB and is usually installed on newer pcs. Also, you can ship your application with the MFC libraries packaged into a dll which is again <2MB
The trade of here is you need to program in C++, the libraries overall are a very thin layer over the native libraries. and people have had harsh opinions about MFC. I've barely just tried it.
Win32 API - This is going all bare bones, and quite difficult, you could use C or C++ but you'd really have to know a lot about the Win32 API and how windows itself works (Stuff like windows messages, hwnds etc) Its not fun, believe me. But during deployment you would not need any external libraries.
There are tons more options, see here:
Native Windows Application Development Options
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2711599/what-programming-language-should-i-use-to-create-small-native-windows-applicatio
Here are some links on MFC that might help:
Want to learn Windows Programming,some suggestions?
How do I decide whether to use ATL, MFC, Win32 or CLR for a new C++ project?
C++ MFC vs .NET?
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/557114/stick-with-mfc-or-go-to-net
you are able to create native exe by using c++ Win 32 projects.
Alas, nearly everything requires a download runtime library and even if you have one installed, you'll need to download updates for them almost continually. Even Microsoft C++ apps nowadays come with security updates that have to be installed if you've compiled your app with them.
But.. there is a solution of sorts. If you use C++, it has a feature where only the things you use are compiled into the final app. Normally, this would require linking with all the library dlls, but if you statically link with the library, you will end up with a single .exe that is as small as can be, and you will not need any dlls (as all the code contained in the library will be compiled into the .exe).
The benefits are debatable compared to dlls, but as MS has pretty much broken the idea of shared dlls in .NET (ie, you practically have to put all the shared dlls in the same directory as your running app, giving you a nightmare in maintenance if you have these shared dlls spread around all your apps) then there's not much of a difference anymore. Static linking is getting a little bit of a comeback and sounds like its what you want.
For modern C++ development, you'll probably want to take a look at Qt instead of MFC. Its a lot nicer to use and is cross-platform so you can run Qt apps on your Android or Linux platforms as well as Windows.