I am making a static library of my own. I have taken my code which works and now put it into a static library for another program to use. In my library I am using another static library which I don't want the people who will be using my API to know. Since, I want to hide that information from them I can't tell them to install the other static library.
Anyway, I used the command line Lib.exe to extract and create a smaller lib file of just the obj's I used. However, I get a bunch of LNK4006 :second definition ignored linker warnings for each obj I use followed by LNK4221 no public symbols found;archive member will be inaccessible.
I am doing this work in vs2008 and I am not sure what I am doing wrong.
I am using the #pragma comment line in my .cpp file
I have also modified the librarian to add my smaller .lib along with its location.
my code simply makes calls to a couple functions which it should be able to get from those Obj file in the smaller lib.
All my functions are implemented in .cpp file and my header just have the includes of the third party header files and come standard c++ header files. nothing fancy. I have actually no function definitions in there atm. I was going to put the API definition in there and implement that in the .cpp for this static lib that i was going to make. However, I just wanted to build my code before I added more to it.
I did read http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;815773 but it did not provide a solution.
Even if you extract all objects from the other library and put them in your own library, your users will still be able to see what's in your library and thus see all the object names. In many cases the names of the objects will reveal what's actually the other library you are using.
Instead of distributing your library as a static library, consider distributing it as a DLL. In the DLL you can easily hide all the underlying things and only make public what you want to make public.
Related
I have about a dozen functions all related to the same purpose, and I am trying to create a library. A library that I can store away in a directory somewhere that I can then include as an include directory and just go about my business including said library in my projects that require its use.
Side Note:
First I'd like to say, I have given considerable time into finding an answer to this. I had thought I found a solution to it when I realized the linker would throw errors when I included the library in multiple source files. Now that I know that, I have again searched for an answer to my woes. I started looking at other libraries I know to do the same thing, or that I believe to. I looked at conio.h as I include it all the time for its kbhit() and getch() functions. Though I didn't understand most of what I had in it, I searched a few keywords and found that it may in fact be including the function definitions through a dll.
I've also done a handful of google searches.
To explain what I am doing a little bit. I have create 2 or 3 data structures that allow me to create chunks of data with headers that specify what the data is and how it is to be treated. Then a couple more for reading and writing those chunks to files.
To allow easy creation of these structures I have made stand-alone functions. To allow easy manipulation of these structures I have made even more stand-alone functions.
I, simply put, need a way to include a library that somehow directly or indirectly defines all these functions and structures. How can I do so?
(without creating a myriad of inlines)
You can include a .lib dependency in your code by using the #pragma comment
#pragma comment (lib,"LibraryFileName.lib")
You can read more about #pragma comment here.
I normally like to make a a Linker.h file in my library soultion and include that file in every header found in my library. Here is an example of it.
#ifndef __GRAPHICCOMMUNICATOR_GUARD_linklib__
#define __GRAPHICCOMMUNICATOR_GUARD_linklib__
#if defined(_DEBUG)
#pragma comment (lib,"GraphicCommunicator-mt-d.lib")
#elif !defined(_DEBUG)
#pragma comment (lib,"GraphicCommunicator-mt.lib")
#else
#error link: no suitable library
#endif
#endif // __GRAPHICCOMMUNICATOR_GUARD_linklib__
Putting everything in one header is causing the problem.
You can leave class member funnctions defined inline or other inline function in headers and include them more than once.
Otherwise you need to move implementations into cpp files and build a static (or dynamic) library. If you are learning, static may be easier. Make a new project and select "Static library" from the application settings.
To use the library you could use the #pragma answer from Caeser, or just add the .lib to the linker settings in the projects that wish to use it, along with #including the headers you need.
I am a fairly seasoned Java programmer, so i understand what including does, and why to do it, BUT, I am using java for a example, When i need a method i can go to the structure and open the jars and see what is there, but i have been watching some tut's and they say you are going to need to include this .h file because it has this function etc, So the question: I typed #include<.h> and got a list of all the .h files, but NOWHERE do i see what is in those files, so if i need to use a function that gets to the system properties(Just a example), how do you know what to include, I am really not liking C right now for this only reason.
functions do not exist in a header file (.h). They exist in .lib, .so, .dll etc files depending on whether they are static or dynamic and depending on the operating system. The header file just declares/prototypes the function. Typically the documentation of a function tells you which header it's declared in.
Header files are text files. You can open them in any text editor to see them, to see what functions they declare.
Typically, if the documentation doesn't tell me the header (rare), I go to the headers directory and either do a grep (on Linux/Unixes) or a findstr on windows to figure out where the function I want is declared.
Another thing to know is that including the right header file will help in compilation of your program but may not ensure that your program will link to build the final binary. For that you link with the right lib file. Again the documentation of the function will tell which is the right lib to link with. In the microsoft world, some header files may have a pragma lib entry which ensures that including the header automatically links in the right lib file.
A lot of the documentation is also available online - msdn, cppreference etc.
I just started a graphical C++ course and I have problem getting an overview how it is.
we got some starting code, two files; one of type "C++ Source" and another of "C/C++ Header".
its supposed to be a graphical program which fills the screen with color.
also, we are using some custom libraries such as SDL and GLM, in the same folder as those two files there is a folder named gml and loads of subfolders, which I wont get into.
I have downloaded mingw, cmake and Visual Studio 11 beta for c++.
I've tried making a normal Win32 program and also a forms-application for the graphical part, but its always something wrong when compiling.
My question: how are you supposed to handle C++ files? I just got used to java and there its so easy to just open the .java file and paste into your IDE, dealing with C++ makes me really confused.
Hmm... Where to begin...
Somethings that happen behind the scenes in other languages are much more visible in C++. The process of obtaining a binary (say, an executable) from C++ involves first compiling the source code (There are sub-steps of this but the compiler handles them) to obtain object files, then the object files are linked by the linker to generate a binary.
In theory, you could simply #include all the cpp files in a project, and compile them all together and "link" (although there's nothing to link) but that would take a very long time, and more importantly, in complex projects that could deplete the memory available to your compiler.
So, we split our projects into compilation units, and by convention a .cpp file represents a single compilation unit. A compilation unit is the part of your project that gets compiled to generate one object file. Even though compilation units are compiled separately, some code has to be common among them, so that the piece of code in each of them can use the functionalities implemented by the others. .h files conventionally serve this purpose. Things are basically declared (sort of announced) in them, so that each compilation unit knows what to expect when it's a part of a linking process to generate a binary.
There's also the issue with libraries. You can find mainly two kinds of things in libraries;
Already implemented functionality, shipped to you in the form of binary files including CPU instructions that can almost be run (but they've to be inserted in the right place). This form is accompanied by .h files to let your .cpp files know what to expect in the library.
The second type is functionality implemented directly in the .h
files. Yes, this is possible under special cases. There are cases,
where the implementation has to (a weak has to) accompany the
declaration (inlined functions, templated types etc.).
The first type comes in two flavors: A "static library" (.lib in windows, .a in linux), that enters your executable and becomes a part of it during linking, and a "dynamic library", that is exposed to your binary (so it knows about it) but that doesn't become a part of it. So, your executable will be looking for that dynamic library (.dll files in windows and .so files in linux f.x.) while it's run.
So, in order for your .cpp files to be able to receive services from libraries, they have to #include their .h files, to know about what there is in them. Later on, during linking, you have to show the linker where (what path in the file system) to find the binary components of those libraries. Finally, if the library is dynamic, the .dll's (or .so's etc.) must be accessible during run time (keep them in the same folder for instance).
While compiling your compilation units you have to tell the compiler where to find the .h files. Otherwise, all it will see will be #include <something.h> and it won't know where to find that file. with gcc, you tell the compiler with the -I option. Note that, you just tell the folder. Also of importance is that if the include directive looks like #include<somefolder/somefile.h> you shouldn't include somefolder in the path. So the invocation looks like:
g++ mycompilationunit.cpp -IPATH/TO/THE/INCLUDED/FILES -IPATH/TO/OTHER/INCLUDED/FILES -c
The -c option tells the compiler that it shouldn't attempt to make an executable just from this compilation unit, so it creates a .o file, to be linked with others later. Since we don't tell it the output file name, it spits out mycompilationunit.o.
Now we want to generate our binary (you probably want an executable, but you could also want to create a library of yours). So we have to tell the linker everything that goes into the binary. All the object files and all the static and dynamic libraries. So, we say: (Note g++ here also acts as the linker)
g++ objectfile1.o objectfile2.o objectfile3.o -LPATH/TO/LIBRARY/BINARIES -llibrary1 -llibrary2 -o myexecutable
Here, -L option is self explanatory in the example. -l option tells which binaries to look for. The linker will accept both static and dynamic libraries if it finds them on the path, and if it finds both, it'll choose one. Note that what goes after -l is not the full binary name. For instance in linux library names take the form liblibrary.so.0 but they're referred to as -llibrary in the linker command. finally -o tells the compiler what name to give to your executable. You need some other options to f.x. create a dynamic library, but you probably don't need to know about them now.
What is the difference between a .cpp file and a .h file?
Look at this answer. Also a quick google search explains a bit too.
Pretty much .h (header) files are declerations and .cpp (source) files are definitions. It is possible to combine both files into one .cpp file but as projects get bigger and bigger its becomes annoying and almost unreasonable.
Hope that helps.
In C++ there is a notion of a function declaration (the function signature) and a function definition (the actual code).
A header file (*.h) contains the declarations of functions and classes. A source file (*.cpp, *.c++, *.C) contains the definitions.
A header file can be included in a source file using #include directive.
When you define a class in C++, you typically only include the declarations of the member functions (methods in Java lingo), and you put the class definition into a header file. The member function definitions containing the body of each function are typically put outside the class definition and into the source file.
Generally the best thing to do here is to get a book on C++ or C, and to look at some sample code.
Header files (.h) are supposed to contain definitions of classes, methods, and variables. Source file (.cpp) will contain the code. So in your .cpp file you need to include the header file as #include "header-file-name.h".
Then use g++ to compile the .cpp file. Make sure that the path to .h file is correct.
If you are using CodeBlocks or Visual Studio, then just compiling the project and running will do everything for you. You can also add .h or .cpp file from there. You need not worry about anything.
Hope this helps.
I am creating a project that uses a DLL. To build my project, I need to include a header file, and a lib file. Why do I need to include the respective lib file? shouldn't the header file declare all the needed information and then at runtime load any needed library/dll?
Thanks
In many other languages, the equivalent of the header file is all you need. But the common C linkers on Windows have always used import libraries, C++ linkers followed suit, and it's probably too late to change.
As a thought experiment, one could imagine syntax like this:
__declspec(dllimport, "kernel32") void __stdcall Sleep(DWORD dwMilliseconds);
Armed with that information the compiler/linker tool chain could do the rest.
As a further example, in Delphi one would import this function, using implicit linking, like so:
procedure Sleep(dwMilliseconds: DWORD); stdcall; external 'kernel32';
which just goes to show that import libraries are not, a priori, essential for linking to DLLs.
That is a so-called "import library" that contains minimal wiring that will later (at load time) ask the operating system to load the DLL.
DLLs are a Windows (MS/Intel) thing. The (generated) lib contains the code needed to call into the DLL and it exposes 'normal' functions to the rest of your App.
No, the header file isn't necassarily enough. The header file can contain just the declarations of the functions and classes and other things you need, not their implementations.
There is a world of difference between this code:
void Multiply(int x, int y);
and this code:
void Multiply(int x, int y)
{
return x * y;
}
The first is a declaration, and the second is a definition or implementation. Usually the first example is put in header files, and the second one is put in .CPP files (If you are creating libraries). If you included a header with the first and didn't link in anything, how is your application supposed to know how to implement Multiply?
Now if you are using header files that contain code that is ALL inlined, then you do not need to link anything. But if even one method is NOT inlined, but has its implementation in a .CPP file that is compiled to a .lib file, than you need to link in the .lib file.
[EDIT]
With your use of Import Libraries, you are telling the linker to NOT include the implementation details of the imported code into your binary. Instead the OS will then load the import DLL at run-time into your process. This will make your application smaller, but you have to ship another DLL with it. If the implementation of the library changes, you can just reship another DLL to your customers, and not have to reship the entire application.
There is another option where you can just link in a library and you don't need to ship another DLL. That option is where the Linker will include the implementation into your application, making it bigger in size. If you have to change the implementation details in the imported library, then you have to recompile and relink your entire application, and reship the entire thing to your customers.
There are two relevant phases in the building process here:
compilation: from the source code to an object file. During the compilation, the compiler needs to know what external things are available, for that one needs a declaration. Declarations designed to be used in several compilation units are grouped in header. So you need the headers for the library.
linking: For static libraries, you need the compiled version of the library. For dynamic libraries, in Unix you need the library, in windows, you need the "import library".
You could think that a library could also embed the declarations or the header could include the library which needs to be linked. The first is often done in other languages. The second is sometimes available through pragmas in C and C++, but there is no standard way to do this and would be in conflict with common usage (such as choosing a library among several which provide code variant for the same declarations, for instance debug/release single thread/multithreads). And neither choice correspond well with the simple compilation model of C and C++ which has its roots in the 60's.
The header file is consumed by the compiler. It contains all the forward declarations of functions, classes and global variables that will be used. It may also contain some inline function definitions as well.
These are used by the compiler to give it the bare minimum information that it needs to compile your code. It will not contain the implementation details.
However you still need to link in all the function, and variable definitions that you have told the compiler about. Failure to do so will result in a linker error. Often this is contains in other object files which may be joined into a single static library.
In the case of DLLs (or .so files), we still need to tell the linker where in the DLL or shared object the missing symbols are. On windows, this information is contained in a .lib file. This will generate the code to load and link the code at runtime.
On unix the the dll and lib files are combined into a single .so file which you must link against to about linker errors.
You can still use a dll without a .lib file but you will then have to load and link in all the symbols manually using operating system APIs.
from 1000 ft, the lib contains the list of the functions that dll exports and addresses that are needed for the call.
In a c++ project I am working on, I have a simple c++ file that needs to run some code at the beginning of the program execution. This file is linked into a static library, which is then linked into the main program.
I have similar code in other files running fine, that looks something like:
bool ____nonexistent_value = executeAction();
However, it does not work inside this file unless I make use of a function implemented in this file. It does work if the library is compiled as a shared library. I'd prefer to link this statically as the library is only a convenience as the file is in a different directory.
Update (Solution):
For now creating shared instead of static libraries makes everything work. Later I will look into getting everything linking with static libraries. Thanks for everyone's help!
If no symbol is referenced in that particular file then the file will not be included by the linker. You have two options:
Remove the file from library and include it (object or source file) directly in the command line for compilation/linking. Then the file should be included in executable.
Have a symbol in a file which you reference from from other files (for example the one with main() definition), this should "pull" the file during linking.
I'm not sure if there's a way to guarantee such static allocation in a static library, but you can always make it explicit. Provide an init function for your library that will be called from main to setup everything you need. This way you don't have to worry about linkers omitting code that's apparently unused, etc.
There's no guaranteed order for static initialization. You want to be very careful with this!