On Windows, no matter which framework you use, all the frameworks need, ultimately, to call the user mode user32::CreateWindowEx API to actually create a window on the desktop.
On Ubuntu, or indeed Linux systems in general, it seems that the choices are to use a widget framework like Wx or Qt or GTK+ to create a GUI application, but all these frameworks feel like they are wrapping something more fundamental. Do these all talk directly to X on Linux? I thought Ubuntu was moving to a non X window manager, so what are they going to use then?
What library would I use to access the window manager all these frameworks use?
They are all wrapping Xlib , if you ever switch to non-X server you will need an Xlib replacement along with it (or an Xlib wrapper).
You could in principle write your own X library by learning the X11 protocol and all the related extensions (ICCCM, desktop conventions, ...) but that is a huge task. You would use the lowest level system calls (send, recv, ...) if you did that.
Some implementations of some languages (SML, Common Lisp, Ocaml) made that choice of implementing the X11 protocol without using the Xlib or XCB C libraries. But it is such a big task that I won't recommend it.
And the Wayland that Ubuntu speaks about is not mature yet, but the toolkit libraries (like GTK and Qt) are slowly moving to support it (in addition of supporting X11).
Today, you also have the option to develop Web based applications instead of X11 based ones. Sometimes HTTP + XHTML + AJAX is simpler that recoding an X11 thing from scratch.
But don't start alone the writing of a graphical stack... it is too big a task...
X operates over a carefully specified network protocol, so you can speak this protocol directly to the server if you like. In practice, GUI toolkits wrap Xlib (and possibly Xt). Traditionally Xlib was as low as it went, but now Xlib has been reimplemented on top of a much cleaner low-level X protocol library "xcb".
Related
I'm trying to write a small programme that needs to load a few files chosen by the user. I thought it'd be easier to use the Linux system's default file picker rather than write my own, but I literally don't have a clue where to even start looking.
So, can anyone recommend a quick and easy way to use the system's file picker on Linux in C?
As I commented, many Linux systems (e.g. a rented VPS, a consumer router box, ...) don't have any graphical user interfaces (often above X11).
If you want a GUI toolkit in C for Linux, consider using GTK. Then look at GtkFileChooserWidget & GtkFileChooser
If you want a GUI toolkit in C++ for Linux, consider using Qt.
If you want a terminal interface, learn ncurses.
If you want a web interface, use some HTTP server library like libonion or Wt, or make a FastCGI program for your existing web server.
Perhaps coding a simple shell script might be easier. Read Advanced Bash Scripting Guide. You could also use a scripting language like Python, Ruby, Ocaml, ...
If you don't know about Linux programming, read Advanced Linux Programming first. See also intro(2) & intro(3)
... a small program that needs to load a few files chosen by the user.
Just pass them as command-line arguments. It's much easier and doesn't tie you to a given GUI toolkit.
You can easily write a shell wrapper using kdialog on KDE, or dialog if you want curses in a terminal, or ... whatever other tool for whatever other environment.
I looked at some other questions on SO and its not clear if c is built on top of, under, or alongside the WINAPI. Like for example could someone write something in pure c that was able to open a window, or would they need to use the windows api?
I noticed similarities between the c (library?) version of opening a file (fopen) vs the windows API version (CreateFile) which makes me wonder if one is just a wrapper for the other. Does anyone know?
If windows is running; is a programmer forced to program using the windows api to get something running on it or can the programmer not use the windows api at all and directly access the hardware (ie. does the windows operating system protect access to the hardware)?
Which is more portable between different versions of windows of windows ce. The documentation I found (which has now changed) used to say that CreateFile only goes back to version 2.0 of windows ce (here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms959950.aspx -
Notice the note on the link at the very bottom that shows the supported version information has been changed). So what is one supposed to use for windows ce version 1? In other words is programming using c functions or the functions labeled WINAPI more likely to work on all versions of windows CE?
I read the following in a book about programming windows ce and it confused me, so all of the above questions can be understood better in context of making sense of the following:
Windows CE supports the most of the same file I/O functions found on Windows NT and Windows 98. The same Win32 API calls, such as CreateFile, ReadFile, WriteFile and CloseFile, are all supported. A Windows CE programmer must be aware of a few differences, however. First of all, the standard C file I/O functions, such as fopen, fread, and fprintf, aren't supported under Windows CE. Likewise, the old Win16 standards, _lread, _lwrite, and _llseek, aren't supported. This isn't really a huge problem because all of these functions can easily be implemented by wrapping the Windows CE file functions with a small amount of code.
My understanding of wrapping is that you have to have something to wrap, given how it appears that win16 and c library are not available is he stating to wrap the CreateFile function to make your own c-like version of fopen? (The only other thing I am aware of is assembly, and if that is what he was suggesting to wrap it wouldn't be written in such a casual manner.)
Given the above, what is the dependency relationship between c language (syntax, data structures, flow control), the c function library (ex. fopen), and the windows api (ex. CreateFile)?
C existed long before Windows did. The Windows API is a bunch of libraries written in C. It may or may not be possible to duplicate its functionality yourself, depending on what Microsoft has documented or made available through the API. At some level it is likely that fopen() and CreateFile() each call the same or a similar operating system service, but it's unlikely that one is a strict wrapper for the other. It would probably be difficult to bypass the Windows API to access the hardware directly, but anything is possible given enough time and programming effort.
C doesn't know anything about GUIs, and VERY little about operating systems at all. Anything you do graphics-wise in C is through the use of libraries, of which the win32 api is an example.
The windows API is implemented in the C programming language. Functionality provided by the C standard libraries, such as fopen, is portable because it is compiled down to the appropriate assembly code for different architectures by different compilers. Windows API functions such as CreateFile only work on machines running Windows and are therefore not portable.
In theory it's possible to write C that talks directly to the hardware. Back in the days of MS-DOS (for one example) quite a few of us did on a fairly regular basis (since MS-DOS simply didn't provide what we needed). Edit: On some small embedded systems, it's still quite commonplace, but on typical desktop systems and such this has mostly disappeared.
Two things have changed. First, modern systems such as Linux and Windows are much more complete, so there's a lot less need to deal directly with the hardware. Second, most systems now run in protected mode, so normal user code can't talk directly to the hardware -- it has to go through some sort of device driver.
Yes, most of the C library uses the underlying OS so (for example) on Windows, fopen and fwrite will eventually call CreateFile and WriteFile, but on Linux they'll eventually call open and write instead.
I noticed similarities between the c (library?) version of opening a file (fopen) vs the windows API version (CreateFile)
Not surprising. They do similar things.
[is] one is just a wrapper for the other? Does anyone know?
You can't find out because the source code is owned and kept as a trade secret.
It doesn't matter which is more "fundamental". You use the windows API from a windows program. You use C API's from C programs.
Notice that it doesn't matter. You can use C API's or Windows API's intermixed.
If windows is running; is someone forced to use the windows api to get something running on it or can they bypass windows entirely and directly access the hardware?
"Directly access the hardware"? What does that mean? If windows is running, then.... well... Windows is running. Windows mediates your access to the hardware.
Use bootcamp or GRUB or some other bootloader to bypass Windows and have "direct access to the hardware".
If they can, is it possible to damage the hardware if you don't know what your doing?
What does this mean? Are you asking if you can "damage" some rotating media (i.e., disks) by misusing their drivers? You can corrupt your hard disk no matter what OS you're running or not running. A privileged account and dumb software can write bad data on a disk. Does that count as "damage"?
Which is more portable?
What does that mean? To another Windows computer? To a computer not running Windows? What are you asking about? Please clarify your question to define what you mean by "portable".
between different versions of windows
Since different Windows are mutually incompatible, I generally suggest using only the POSIX standard libraries and avoiding all Windows API's.
However, some Windows variants (e.g. Windows mobile for phone vs. Windows "Server") are essentially totally incompatible. There is very little reason for any piece of software to run on both OS's. Portability doesn't much matter. Why try to run a phone app on a server?
Edit
So theres the c language on the bottom (closest to the hardware), then the windows API next, then the C library on top of the Windows API?
This doesn't make sense. You're mixing up two unrelated things. The "language" and the "libraries" have little to do with each other.
Also, the API is not the operating system. So by using Windows "API" all the time, you're making this more confusing than it needs to be.
Here's a way to look at this.
The Windows Operating System has several API's. There are underlying function libraries that are not part of the application interface. They're "internal".
It has a native Windows API. Callable from C.
It has a POSIX API. Callable from C. In some cases, the Posix API generally uses the Windows API.
Most operating systems, including Windows are written in C (and or assembler). The Library is then modified for each operating system to do the basic stuff. (Sockets, Files, Memory, etc ...).
The WINAPI is just a bunch of libraries (written in C and/or Assembler) that allow access to functionality within the OS.
It is not Windows related, after you changed your question, I think what you are trying to understand is the bootstrapping of an OS (Windows or other).
The book Operating Systems Design and implementation discusses the implementation of Minix (Which Linux is based on).
the WINAPI provides an interface that developers in C can use in order to use the WINAPI functionality. C++ programs can also use it.
Operating systems such as Windows contain WINAPI libraries that provide access to some operating system functionality and sometimes contact with Hardware, these libraries are written in C
Carl Norum pointed out that C existed long before Windows, but don't forget that the Windows API kind of started with the MS-DOS API, which kind of started with the CP/M API. C only existed a short time before CP/M.
Lots of answers seem to imply that the Windows API is built on C, but that seems doubtful too. __stdcall is a synonym for PASCAL, which was a keyword in Microsoft's C compilers because the Windows API was built on Pascal. __cdecl is the default for function calls in C and C++ programs compiled by Visual Studio but it doesn't work on calls to APIs.
The relationship between C and the Windows API is that they are capable of working with each other.
As a fun note, you can really get a handle on the 'power' of the Windows API by taking a look at AutoIt http://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/. AutoIt is a great little scripting language that can create GUIs, run command line apps, manipulate windows and processes, etc. Yes, it does File I/O and networking.
I'm working on a project that's supposed to work on both Windows and Linux (with an unofficial Mac port as well) that emulates a true colour system console.
My problem is that recently there appeared a request for textfield support (yes, console-based) and it would be cool to add the possibility of copying text to clipboard and pasting from it. Is there a way of achieving this that will:
be done in C (not C++),
work in both Windows and in Linux (preprocessor macros are an option if there's no platform-independent code),
require no extra libraries to link to?
Thanks in advance for your help.
If you're not using a cross platform UI library (like wx or something), then it sounds like you're just going to have to write native clipboard code for each platform you want to support.
Remember, on Macintoshes, you copy with Command-C, not Ctrl+C :)
The clipboard is inherently an operating system defined concept. The C language itself has no knowledge of what a clipboard is or how to operate on it. You must either interface directly with the OS, or use a portability library that does this on your behalf. There is no way around this.
Personally I would define my your own function
getClipboardText();
That is defined in two different header files (linux_clipboard.h, windows_clipboard.h, etc) and then do pre-proccessor stuff to load the appropriate one accordingly. I don't really code in C/C++ so I'm sorry if that didn't make any sense or is bad practice but that's how I'd go about doing this.
#if WIN32
#include windows_clipboard.h
#endif
That sort of thing
Remember:
For linux you have to deal with different window managers (Gnome, KDE) all with different ways of managing the clipboard. Keep this in mind when designing your app.
You may be able to communicate to the clipboard by using xclip. You can use this python script here to do this job via communicating with 'dcop' and 'klipper' here. That is for KDE, I do not know how it would be done under GNOME... You may also be able to do this independantly of either GNOME/KDE by using DBUS, although I cannot say 100% confidently on that either...
Just be aware, that for a truly cross-platform job, you have to take into account of the different GUI's such as under Linux, X is the main window manager interface and either GNOME/KDE sits on top of it..I am not singling out other GUI's such as FluxBox, WindowMaker to name but a few, and that there will be a lot of platform dependant code, and also in conjunction, you will be dealing with Windows clipboard as well..all in all, a big integrated code...
Have you not considered looking at the raw X programming API for clipboard support? Maybe that might be better as I would imagine, GNOME/KDE etc are using the X's API to do the clipboard work...if that is confirmed, then the work would be cut out and be independant of the major GUI interfaces...(I hope that would be the case as it would make life easier for your project!)
Perhaps using compile-time switches, for each platform...WIN, KDE, GNOME, MAC or use the one that is already pre-defined..
Hope this helps,
Best regards,
Tom.
I'm lookin for a portable wiimote library. I want to use the wiimote for the hardware it has (but I don't need to access any data stored on it).
Required features:
access to all the buttons (as an exception, no use of the power button is OK)
make the wiimote play sound
talk to nunchuks and classic controllers
preferably: make the wiimote rumble.
interface with C. Preferably native C. Bonus points for bindings with Haskell or python.
The library should port to Linux, Windows and OS X (in order of importance) and should be agnostic with respect to CPU architecture.
Anyone got a good suggestion?
Haven't use it (I've only read about the managed Wiimote library really), but you may want to check out wiiuse. It seems like the most complete of the native libararies.
Others include:
GlovePIE
WiiYourself
You can use my WiiMouse program to do this (which is based on the wiimotelib open source project), it allows you to connect via named pipes and play PCM sounds and use all the attachments including the MotionPlus, it even calculates the MotionPLus vectors for you, you can get it here:
http://home.exetel.com.au/amurgshere/wiimouse.phtml
See the download for an example on how to connect to a wiimote via named pipes and play sounds and stuff.
What things should be kept most in mind when writing cross-platform applications in C? Targeted platforms: 32-bit Intel based PC, Mac, and Linux. I'm especially looking for the type of versatility that Jungle Disk has in their USB desktop edition ( http://www.jungledisk.com/desktop/download.aspx )
What are tips and "gotchas" for this type of development?
I maintained for a number of years an ANSI C networking library that was ported to close to 30 different OS's and compilers. The library didn't have any GUI components, which made it easier. We ended up abstracting out into dedicated source files any routine that was not consistent across platforms, and used #defines where appropriate in those source files. This kept the code that was adjusted per platform isolated away from the main business logic of the library. We also made extensive use of typedefs and our own dedicated types so that we could easily change them per platform if needed. This made the port to 64-bit platforms fairly easy.
If you are looking to have GUI components, I would suggest looking at GUI toolkits such as WxWindows or Qt (which are both C++ libraries).
Try to avoid platform-dependent #ifdefs, as they tend to grow exponentially when you add new platforms. Instead, try to organize your source files as a tree with platform-independent code at the root, and platform-dependent code on the "leaves". There is a nice book on the subject, Multi-Platform Code Management. Sample code in it may look obsolete, but ideas described in the book are still brilliantly vital.
Further to Kyle's answer, I would strongly recommend against trying to use the Posix subsystem in Windows. It's implemented to an absolute bare minimum level such that Microsoft can claim "Posix support" on a feature sheet tick box. Perhaps somebody out there actually uses it, but I've never encountered it in real life.
One can certainly write cross-platform C code, you just have to be aware of the differences between platforms, and test, test, test. Unit tests and a CI (continuous integration) solution will go a long way toward making sure your program works across all your target platforms.
A good approach is to isolate the system-dependent stuff in one or a few modules at most. Provide a system-independent interface from that module. Then build everything else on top of that module, so it doesn't depend on the system you're compiling for.
XVT have a cross platform GUI C API which is mature 15+ years and sits on top of the native windowing toollkits. See WWW.XVT.COM.
They support at least LINUX, Windows, and MAC.
Try to write as much as you can with POSIX. Mac and Linux support POSIX natively and Windows has a system that can run it (as far as I know - I've never actually used it). If your app is graphical, both Mac and Linux support X11 libraries (Linux natively, Mac through X11.app) and there are numerous ways of getting X11 apps to run on Windows.
However, if you're looking for true multi-platform deployment, you should probably switch to a language like Java or Python that's capable of running the same program on multiple systems with little or no change.
Edit: I just downloaded the application and looked at the files. It does appear to have binaries for all 3 platforms in one directory. If your concern is in how to write apps that can be moved from machine to machine without losing settings, you should probably write all your configuration to a file in the same directory as the executable and not touch the Windows registry or create any dot directories in the home folder of the user that's running the program on Linux or Mac. And as far as creating a cross-distribution Linux binary, 32-bit POSIX/X11 would probably be the safest bet. I'm not sure what JungleDisk uses as I'm currently on a Mac.
There do exist quite few portable libraries just examples I've worked within the past
1) glib and gtk+
2) libcurl
3) libapr
Those cover nearly every platform and so they are extremly useful tool.
Posix is fine on Unices but well I doubt it's that great on windows, besides we do not have any stuff for portable GUIs there.
I also second the recommendation to separate code for different platforms into different modules/trees instead of ifdefs.
Also I recommend to check beforehand what are the differences in you platforms and how you could abstract them. E.g. this is some OS related stuff (e.g. the annoying CR,CRLF,LF in text files), or hardware stuff. E.g. the previous mentioned posix compability doesnt stop you from
int c;
fread(&c, sizeof(int), 1, file);
But on different hardware platforms the internal memory layout can be complete different (endianess), forcing you to use conversion functions on some of the target platforms.
You can use NAppGUI for both console and desktop apps. The SDK uses ANSI-C and your code will work on Windows/macOS/Linux.
https://www.nappgui.com
It's free and OpenSource.