I have heard of Boost and ACE as two of the well known C++ libraries. What are the other good C/C++ libraries available?
Does Boost and ACE support session management for web applications written in C/C++?
EDIT: Ok I will try to be domain specific. I am looking for a C/C++ library which could help me maintain session state for a C++ based CGI web application.
When you're trying to build a web application in C++ I'd recommend Wt, a Qt-like framework for creating web applications in C++.
It handles sessions either in one process per session (when security matters) or multiple sessions per process.
You can either use the built-in webserver or use it with any webserver that supports FastCGI.
(Also, I'd recommend it over Boost.CGI as it seems to be maintained and feature-complete).
Depends if you are talking about general purpose or domain specific libraries. For general purpose Boost is best of breed (and don't forget about the good old STL), so I don't see the point of looking for something else that will cover much of the same ground, but is not as polished. As for domain specific you'd have to specify the domain :-)
If you're interested in C (not C++) as well, glib (the Gnome project's utility library) provides a number of useful data structures and constructs.
C++ has libraries for anything you could imagine, so the scope of your question is rather undefined. What interests you? Web applications, scientific programs, GUIs? Specify what you need exactly if you want a good answer.
Boost is a general-purpose library for relatively low-level things. It's rather complex and advanced though, so you should have a good grasp of C++ before you start with it. ACE is mainly for synchronization and communication between threads/processes/applications.
If web applications is what you need, I recommend you to strongly consider the language you're picking. C++ may not be the best direction to go here, unless you have very specific constraints that force your hand.
There is also GTK which is good if you need to have a gui or use unicode. (although c++0x should have better unicode support natively when the standard is complete).
Boost doesn't yet support sessions, but a CGI library has been proposed which should have sessions.
If you want to use C++ for web applications, consider using CGICC
Ok I will try to be domain specific. I am looking for a C/C++ library which could help me maintain session state for a C++ based CGI web application.
CppCMS?
Example of session management: http://cppcms.sourceforge.net/wikipp/en/page/tut_sessions
Reference: http://cppcms.sourceforge.net/wikipp/en/page/ref_cppcms_session_iface
Configuration: http://cppcms.sourceforge.net/wikipp/en/page/ref_config#sessions
Poco is an excellent C++ Library with data access, xml, networking, compression and crypto all wrapped up in once nice little package.
Boost evidently, QT for GUI (that's not clearly a library I know), Electronic Arts Standard Template Library and
Blitz++ if you want to do scientific computation :
Blitz++ is a C++ class library for
scientific computing which provides
performance on par with Fortran 77/90.
The C++ programming language offers
many features useful for tackling
complex scientific computing problems:
inheritance, polymorphism, generic
programming, and operator overloading
are some of the most important.
Unfortunately, these advanced features
came with a hefty performance
pricetag: until recently, C++ lagged
behind Fortran's performance by
anywhere from 20% to a factor of ten.
As a result, the adoption of C++ for
scientific computing has been slow.
Is there a way to soup up C++ so that
we can keep the advanced language
features but ditch the poor
performance? This is the goal of the
Blitz++ project: to develop techniques
which will enable C++ to rival -- and
in some cases even exceed -- the speed
of Fortran for numerical computing,
while preserving an object-oriented
interface. The Blitz++ Numerical
Library is being constructed as a
testbed for these techniques.
Recent benchmarks show C++ encroaching
steadily on Fortran's high-performance
monopoly, and for some benchmarks, C++
is even faster than Fortran! These
results are being obtained not through
better optimizing compilers,
preprocessors, or language extensions,
but through the use of template
techniques. By using templates
cleverly, optimizations such as loop
fusion, unrolling, tiling, and
algorithm specialization can be
performed automatically at compile
time.
Another goal of Blitz++ is to extend
the conventional dense array model to
incorporate new and useful features.
Some examples of such extensions are
flexible storage formats, tensor
notation and index placeholders.
Related
There are a lot of excellent answers how can one simulate object oriented concepts with C. To name a few:
C double linked list with abstract data type
C as an object oriented language
Can you write object-oriented code in C?
When is it appropriate to use such simulation and not to use languages that support object-oriented techniques natively?
Highly related:
Why artificially limit your code to C?
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/482574/whats-the-advantage-of-using-c-over-c-or-is-there-one
I'll give you the one reason I know of because it has been the case for me:
When you are developing software for a unique platform, and the only available compiler is a C compiler. This happens quite often in the world of embedded microcontrollers.
To just give you another example: a fair amount of the x86 Linux kernel is using C as if it were C++, when object-orientation seems natural (eg, in the VFS). The kernel is written in assembly and C (if that wasn't changed in the 3.0 kernel). The kernel coders create macros and structures, sometimes even named similar to C++ terms (eg, for_each_xxx), that allow them to code as-if. As others have pointed out, you'd never choose C if you start a heavily object-oriented program; but when you're adjusting C based code to add object-oriented features, you might.
When you want a cross-platform foundation for object-oriented APIs. A case in point is Apple's Core Foundation. Being entirely C, it could be easily ported, yet provides an extremely rich set of opaque objects to use.
A nice example of its flexibility is the way many of its types are 'toll-free' bridged with those from Foundation (a set of true OO Objective-C libraries). Many types from Core Foundation can be used, fairly naturally, in Foundation APIs, and vice-versa. It's hard to see this working so well without some OO concepts being present in the Core Foundation libraries.
What are some common general purpose library as Boost is to C++ but for C? It should be a cross-platform library and include collections such as trees, linked-lists, queues, etc...
What are the advantages/disadvantages to those libraries?
glib is pretty nice because:
liberally licensed (LGPL)
constant development
tons of data structures
trees
lists
queues
caches
etc.
good documentation
lots of sample code
development "assistance"
logging
thread abstraction
thread pools
test framework
timers
Unicode support
many supported platforms
regular expressions
tons more...
The Apache portable runtime project
http://apr.apache.org/
is good. Covers basic datastructures and is very good at network and IO abstraction.
The later is a magnitude better then glib.
Unfortunately most document links on the apache websites are broken at the moment :-(
But this one works work http://apr.apache.org/docs/apr/1.4/modules.html
Everyone knows how awesome C language is and how much it sucks in text processing tasks. Given these facts. Regex definitely must be part of ISO C. But it isn't. I don't understand why? Are there people who think its not essential?
Regular Expressions don't belong in the C language proper any more than a sound library, a graphics library, or an encryption library does. Doing so would reduce the general purpose nature of the language and greatly inhibit its use as a small and efficient embedded language.
The philosophy of C was to have a very small and efficient language keyword set with standardized libraries for the next layer of functionality. Since things like regex, graphics, sound, encryption, etc. don't have a single platform or standard they don't fit in with the standard C library.
They fit best as user libraries which they currently are.
Regex is defined as part of IEEE Std 1003.1:2001 (POSIX)
Here's a handly list of which headers are in which standard:
http://www.schweikhardt.net/identifiers.html
Because it is a library feature that would require standardizing on one of the regex languages. Standard bodies are commitee driven, not an easy task.
This document explains the rationalization of the standard: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/C99RationaleV5.10.pdf which might clarify why.
Another reason explained in the doc. is to keep the language simple.
There are quite a few downloads available, just use one.
Because regexes are not essential to a programming language. Handy? Yes, very much so, when you need them. Essential? No way.
Web developers will naturally consider regexes to be an essential feature of a language because they have to validate all that HTML form data. Developers whose experience is always with one of a few big-name relational database servers will consider SQL support to be essential. Those working in the scientific domain will require support for "big numbers" or tensors. GUI developers think a built-in GUI toolkit is essential. Some folks deal with XML all day and consider XML support to be essential.... etc. you get the idea. This list of "essentials" can get pretty big, and languages like Java have certainly taken the "kitchen sink" approach to their massive standard libraries. I appreciate that C is not a kitchen sink language in that sense.
Be careful not to assume that your favorite language feature is an essential feature for everyone else.
The point of C is to be small yet powerful. Since regular expressions are typically a large and complex topic, it belongs in a library. It is too bad though that the C committee doesn't "sponser" some well written, standard C, algorithms/data structure libraries. There is a plethora of them out there. I tend to stick with GNU "sponsored" libs whenever I can since they are available for most platforms even if they aren't necessarily the easiest or most efficient to use. They do strike a nice balance.
Does anyone have any experience with doing this? I'm working on a Java decompiler right now in C++, but would like a higher level language to do the actual transformations of the internal trees. I'm curious if the overhead of marshaling data between languages is worth the benefit of a more expressive and language for better articulating what I'm trying to accomplish (like Haskell). Is this actually done in the "real world", or is it usually pick a language at the beginning of a project and stick with it? Any tips from those who have attempted it?
I'm a big advocate of always choosing the right programming language for each challenge. If there is another language which handles some otherwise tricky task easily, I'd say go for it.
Does it happen in the real world? Yes. I am currently working on a project which is made up of both PHP and objective-c code.
The trick is, as you pointed out, the communication between the two languages. If at all possible, let each language stick to its own domain, and have the two sections communicate in the simplest way possible. In my case, it was XML documents sent via http. In your case, some kind of formatted text file might be the answer.
Marshalling costs depend on the languages and architecture you're working with. For example, if you're on the CLR or JVM, there are low-cost interop solutions available - though I know you are working with probably unmanaged C++.
Another avenue is an embedded domain-specific language. Tree transformations are often expressible via pattern matching and application of a relatively small number of functions. You could consider writing a simple tree pattern-matcher - e.g. something that looks like Lisp s-exprs but uses placeholders to capture variables - with associated actions that are functions that transform the matched subtree.
John Ousterhout, the inventor of Tcl/Tk was a stong advocate of multi-language programming and wrote quite extensively about it. In order to do it, you need a clean interface mechanism between the languages you are using for it. There are quite a few mechanisms for this. Examples of different mechanisms for doing this are:
SWIG (Simplified Wrapper and
Interface Generator can take a c
or c++ (or several other languages)
header file and generate an
interface for a high level language
such as perl or python that allows
you to access the API. There are
other systems that use this
approach.
Java supports JNI, and various
other systems such as Python's
ctypes, VisualWorks DLL/C
connect are native mechanisms
that allow you to explicitly
construct the call to the lower
level subsystem.
Tcl/Tk was designed explicitly to be
embeded, and has a native API
for a C library to add hooks into
the language. The constructs for
this resemble argv[] structures in
C, and were designed to make it
relatively easy to interface a
command-line based C program into
Tcl. This is similar to the above
example, but coming from the opposite
direction. Many scripting languages
such as Python, Lua and Tcl support
this type of mechanism.
Explicit glue mechanisms such as
Pyrex, which are similar to a
wrapper generator, but have their
own language for defining the
interface. Pyrex is actually a
complete programming language.
Middleware such as COM or
CORBA allow a generic
interface definition to be built
externally to the application in an
interface definition language
and language bindings for the
languages concerned to use the
common interface mechanism.
I don't ever recall coming across anything for C that's as extensive as C++'s Boost library.
You can have a look at glib. It provides quite a few interesting things like containers, unicode support, threading...
Have a look at its documentation
I've never seen anything. Really, C++ templates are the enabling technology for STL and much of boost, and C doesn't have them. I've seen many C-interface libraries for things like image processing, 3D graphics, networking, etc., but never a real general-purpose library like boost. You can find pieces though - threading libraries, string libraries, etc. - that are similar to sections of boost.
Depending on what exactly you're trying to do there is APR (The Apache Portable Runtime library) which is what the Apache http daemon is built on
http://apr.apache.org/
For GUI, there is wxWidgets (formerly wxWindows)
http://www.wxwidgets.org/
Glib does compensate it partially in form of various unicode, string types. If you add Gobject you could get some object programming even some garbage collection.
ACE (Adaptive Communication Environment) is sometimes mentioned. It's not quite an apples-to-apples comparison. Boost provides more "basic building blocks" whereas ACE provides more of an tightly integrated framework geared towards telco products. I have used both extensively and I find Boost vastly superior. One big advantage of Boost is that many of its features will show up in the STL extensions for the upcoming C++0x standard (see, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_Report_1).
or you can look at ccan http://ccan.ozlabs.org/
but no, there really isn't any complete package, glib comes closest