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
Related
gcc (GCC) 4.7.2
PJ SIP 2.1
Hello,
I am developing an application that will use the PJSIP API.
Just looking at the API documentation and I see some functions that seem to be just wrappers for the standard C library. i.e. pj_memset, pj_strncpy, pj_strlen, etc.
I can see some alternatives that might be worth considering pj_strncpy_with_null() which will always NULL terminate a string. A another advantage could be is that the pjsip uses a pj_str_t structure to store the string and the size. Which could be better than using a normal C string.
And is there any point using pj_size_t over size_t which is portable anyway?
The link for quick reference is here:
http://www.pjsip.org/pjlib/docs/html/group__PJ__PSTR.htm
It there any real advantage using PJSIP over the standard C library?
Many thanks for any suggestions,
Short answer: Use the PJSIP API (all of it).
Long answer: It depends.
If you were programming an application for standard Desktops, that is, x86/x64 Windows/Mac/Linux, then no, it wouldn't really matter too much if you used the standard C library or wrappers like the PJSIP functions. Practically, of course, there might be functions that take (as you pointed out) the pj_str_t struct instead of a char *; it would be easier then to use the PJSIP API just to simplify and remove the need for conversions.
The reason for wrappers, I'm assuming, is to make it easier to develop on embedded devices. I don't mean just ARM or other non-x86 processors—though it could apply there as well; I mean custom embedded devices: things that have a very specific purpose and change infrequently. These embedded devices have very limited capabilities and sometimes even lack an OS. Without an OS, these processors might not have a malloc function or the like. Frequently, the libraries associated with the devices, since they are customized so much, are not entirely "standard" and differ in some small way. By having wrappers for everything, PJSIP can avoid most issues and even provide implementations across the board for things such as strcpy or malloc such that all devices run the "same" code.
Wrappers also provide the means for "hooks." Hooks enable better error messaging (and possibly handling). It's unclear whether PJSIP is doing this (I have never used PJSIP—I am talking from experience using other frameworks), but I am pointing it out just to show why a framework might bother wrapping everything.
In the end, it boils down to your purpose: if you chose to use PJSIP in the first place, then I would go all out and use all of its API. If you are only using it in a few places (for whatever reason) then it probably doesn't matter. Again, it appears that PJSIP is targeting embedded devices (it lists Nokia and even RTOS systems), where it is fairly common to provide wrappers for even "standard" functions. If this is the case, and you are using it in this way, definitely use the entire API.
Will you be sticking with pjsip?
PJSIP source code ("The Software") is licensed under both General
Public License (GPL) version 2 or later and a proprietary license that
can be arranged...
If you think the GPL may be too restrictive for future expansion (such as Android's no-GPL-in-userspace policy) and their proprietary license is not acceptable, you may benefit from using your own portable code/wrappers that you could use with a less restrictive BSD stlye library like Baresip
There are plenty of other methods to provide needed functionality where the standard C library does not support it, many of which will be better tested (I hate to mention autotools, but... it does support most platforms - some would say too many) Or you could include implementations/adaptations from musl-libc
Another thing to consider is the C api is based on standards and fairly set in stone while the wrappers in a given project are much more free to break API compatibility from version to version (just ask a glib/gtk programmer)
I'm looking for a "core" C cross-platform toolbox, because I need lots of "useful" functions (read/write ini files, network routines, arrays, lists...)
I was thinking about GLib, may be Qt (the core part) but I would appreciate a pure "C" stuff
I think glib is a fantastic choice, but it's perhaps somewhat less widely scoped than what you're after, there is no networking in glib as far as I know.
For that, you need to add GIO from the same family of libraries.
Apache Portable Runtime (APR) may be the solution you are looking for. It is used, among other projects, for the Apache http server and Subversion.
I think glib is great. It comes with a great deal of core algorithms and data types. There are many libraries build around GLib and GObject. You have indeed GIO for all kinds of different input and output on files, over network etc (will remind you a bit of the Java like IO operations), and you gtk for Gui applications. All These libraries were designed with portability in mind and extendibility to other languages (eg. python, perl etc). But learn to use GOjbect as well, because the best work comes from using these libraries ( http://www.gtk.org/documentation.php ) together.
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.
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.