I need to access code in a native C++ DLL in some C# code but am having issues figuring out the marshaling. I've done this before with code that was straight C, but seem to have found that it's not directly possible with C++ classes. Made even more complicated by the fact that many of the classes contain virtual or inline functions. I even tried passing the headers through the PInvoke Interop Assistant, but it would choke on just about everything and not really no what to do... I'm guessing because it's not really supported.
So how, if at all possible, can you use a native C++ class DLL from .NET code.
If I have to use some intermediary (CLR C++?) that's fine.
There is really no easy way to do this in C# - I'd recommend making a simple wrapper layer in C++/CLI that exposes the C++ classes as .NET classes.
It is possible to use P/Invoke and lots of cleverness to call C++ virtual methods, but I wouldn't go this route unless you really had no other choice.
You might have a look at SWIG, if nothing else just to see how they handle the basic wrapper code (which SWIG generates). I know next to nothing about C# native code bindings so I can't judge if their approach is sound, but they do a decent job with some of the other language bindings.
Related
I'm working on an app that I would really like to write in C#, but I need to use a library that is in C++. The vendor supplements their DLL with some C++ code to make the API more convenient, which it does, but it's still C++. I'd like to incorporate this extra C++ code into my app. It seems reasonable to create a DLL to wrap the vendor-supplied C++ code and the other calls into a module that I can use in C#.
My question is, does it make sense to wrap a DLL in another DLL? Are the potential problems I should watch out for?
Best,
John
Wrapping a wrapper for the sake of creating a better API (or, in your case, a .NET API) is OK. You might face some interop problems, as they can always pop up when moving from managed to unmanaged code.
In the course of finding a way to interoperate between C# and C++ I found this article that explains about P/Invoke.
And I read a lot of articles claiming that C++/CLI is not exact C++ and requires some effort to modify from original C++ code.
I want to ask what would be the optimal way when I have some C++ objects (code/data) that I want to use from C# objects.
It looks like that in order to use P/Invoke, I should provide C style API. Is it true? I mean, is there a way to export C++ object to C# like SWIG with P/Invoke? Or, do I have to use SWIG for this purpose?
How hard is it to change C++ to C++/CLI? Is it worth trying compared to rewrite the C++ to C#? The C++ is well designed, so implementing it to C# is not great deal.
(Off the topic question) Is there the other way round? I mean, if I want to use C# code from C++, is there any way to do so?
I would not recommend rewritng your C++ library into C++/CLI. Instead, I would write a C++/CLI wrapper that you can call from C#. This would consist of some public ref class classes, each of which probably just manages an instance of the native class. Your C++/CLI wrapper just "include the header, link to the lib" to use the native library. Because you have written public ref class classes, your C# code just adds a .NET reference. And all you do inside each public ref class is use C++ Interop (aka It Just Works interop) to call the native code. You can apply a facade while you're at it if you like.
The C++/CLI syntax is awkward, but it does allow you to expose managed objects from C++ code. This can be convenient if you have a large C++ API and can abstract some of that functionality to a simpler interface for consumption by your managed code. I've done this successfully for integration with tools like the Matrox vision library, where I could write my vision analysis code in C++ and then use the C++/CLI extensions to expose high-level managed classes. The most painful part is probably string and array inter-op, but strings have always been painful, even in plain C++.
C++/CLI can definitely consume any .NET managed objects, but you have to take special care if you're using any pointers to managed memory (you'll need to use pinning in this case.) If I need to pass pointers to an API, I usually prefer to keep that memory unmanaged and then create managed wrapper classes for manipulating the unmanaged memory.
Further to Kate Gregory's answer, to call C# code from C++, using C++/CLI is the obvious way to do it, as it makes it extremely simple and seamless.
Wrap your C++ native classes, as pointer to implementation, into C++/CLI classes, then call & use these CLR-based classes by 'using'ing them in your .net application. This is my recommended way. DO NOT REWRITE your existing classes in C++/CLI.
I have been keeping up with .NET CLR for awhile now, and my language of choice is C#.
Up until recently, I was unaware that C++/CLI could produce "mixed mode" executables capable of running native and managed code.
Now knowing this, another developer friend of mine were discussing this attribute and trying to determine when and how this ability would be useful.
I take it as a given that native code has the capability to be more efficient and powerful than managed code, at the expense of additional development time.
In the past, I resorted to strictly native C++ code libraries and used Interop to make use of the functionality I wrote into the native library.
I can see the benefit of not requiring an additional library, but I'm curious as to what all the pros/cons of using C++/CLI over soley managed executable created in C#, or such an executable using Interop to call a purely native C++ library?
(Sidenote: Are the terms Interop/PInvoke interchangeable, as I d.on't understand the difference between the terms, simply seen them used the same way.)
With C++/CLI you can create, broadly speaking, three types of objects:
Managed types. These will compile down to essentially the same IL as the equivalent C#. There is no performance opportunity here.
Native types. Compiles down to native code as if you'd used straight C++.
Mixed mode types. These compile down to managed code, but allow you to refer to native types too.
You might think of (3) as being like writing C# code with PInvoke code to accessing the native stuff - except all the PInvoke stuff is generated for you.
There's more to it than that, of course, as well as some caveats - but that should give you an idea of how it's useful.
In other words it's really a glue language. While you can write fully fledged apps in C++/CLI it's more normal to keep the managed and native parts separate and use C++/CLI to bridge the two more cleanly than with PInvoke.
Another common use is to extend and existing, native, C++ code base with .Net library calls.
Just be careful that you partition your code well as it can be quite subtle sometimes in compiling your pure C++ code down to IL transparently!
As to your sidenote: PInvoke is a particular type of Interop. Interop comes in other forms too, such as COM Interop. In fact, more accurately, PInvoke is a set of language features that make Interop with native code easier.
I've used Managed C++ (the .NET 1.1 precursor to C++/CLI) effectively in the past. I find it works best when you have a native C or C++ library you wish to use in managed code. You could go the whole Interop/PInvoke route, which makes for some ugly C# code and frequently has marshalling issues, or you could write a managed C++ wrapper, which is where C++/CLI really shines.
Because C++/CLI is managed code, you can call it from C# (or VB.NET if you lean that way) in the normal way, by adding a reference to the .DLL. No marshalling, no dllimport, nothing goofy like that. Just normal project references. Additionally, you get the benefit of static linked libraries if your native library is so designed, which is a Good Thing (tm).
Phil Nash really hit the big things. Here's one more that I've hit more than once and is the primary reason I've used C++/CLI in the past:
Some applications are extended by checked all DLLs in some location for exported functions with a particular name. In C#, there's no way to declare a native C-style export, but you can in C++/CLI. I create a "wrapper" in C++/CLI that exports the method, handles any translation of C structs to managed objects and passes the call on to an assembly written in C#.
There are certain types that are not available to other languages, such as templates,
const and tracking handle of boxed value types.
templates are specialized at compile-time. generics are specialized at runtime. Although CLR should cache generics specialization for future use (so you get the same List each time you use it), there is still a performance hit each time a generics specialization is requested.
i know other languages discard the const attribute, but have compile time checking in your C++ code is better than nothing.
Having a type like int^ allows you to access the memory on the managed heap directory without unnecessary unboxing. This can help performance when passing tracking handles of boxed values to functions that expect a tracking handle, such as Console::WriteLine(Object^). Of course the early boxing initialization can not be avoided. In other languages you can store the reference in an Object variable and pass it around to avoid unboxing, but you lose the compile time type check.
We have native Win32 C++ code and a set of C# assemblies which we wish to call from the C++ code. I summaries our optios as:
Use COM. The C# code would need to be decorated with additional attributes (GUID, COMVisible). The C# assemblies would need to be registered regasm and would then be available to the native C++ code via COM.
Use a C++/CLI (formerly managed C++) wrapper class. A C++ class could be added to the native C++ project. That class would be compiled with /clr. The native C++ code would call the C++/CLI class which would then call the .Net code. No COM involved. The CLR is started by magic as required with marshalling handled by the C++/CLI extenstions.
Host an instance of the CLR in the native C++ code.
I'm going to discount option 3 as I don't see the benefits over option 2 other than we lose the need for a wrapper class. So the question is, what are the pros/cons of option 1 versus option 2?
Thanks in advance.
Option 2 will perform the best, and be the most seamless and maintainable, IMO.
There is really no advantage to option 1 that I've found. Using C++/CLI seems to function much better, work faster, and be much simpler in general.
You also can, btw, just use the C# assembly directly without having a wrapper class. This does require compiling any files that want to use it with /CLR, but it works quite well.
For option 1 your main pro would be not having to write a wrapper class which can get hairy depending on your project.
For option 2 you won't have to modify your managed library to facilitate unmanaged use, which is sometimes not an option.
For me it comes down to where you want to make your code changes.
With option 2 you also have a pretty straightforward way of subsequently convert your whole application to C++/CLI to avoid the managed/unmanaged transitions that you will get. The transitions could be an issue depending on how you use your referenced assemblies i.e. getting a performance hit.
So far I have had only positive experiences with C++/CLI and can recommend going that route.
I would like to call my unmanaged C++ libraries from my C# code. What are the potential pitfalls and precautions that need to be taken? Thank you for your time.
There are a couple routes you can go with this - one, you can update your unmanaged C++ libraries to have a managed C++ extensions wrapper around them and have C# utilize those classes directly. This is a bit time-consuming, but it provides a nice bridge to legacy unmanaged code. But be aware that managed C++ extensions are sometimes a bit hard to navigate themselves as the syntax is similar to unmanaged C++, but close enough that a very trained eye will be able to see the differences.
The other route to go is have your umnanaged C++ implement COM classes and have C# utilize it via an autogenerated interop assembly. This way is easier if you know your way around COM well enough.
Hope this helps.
This question is too broad. The only reasonable answer is P/Invoke, but that's kind of like saying that if you want to program for Windows you need to know the Win32 API.
Pretty much entire books have been written about P/Invoke (http://www.amazon.com/NET-COM-Complete-Interoperability-Guide/dp/067232170X), and of course entire websites have been made: http://www.pinvoke.net/.
You're describing P/Invoke. That means your C++ library will need to expose itself via a DLL interface, and the interface will need to be simple enough to describe to P/Invoke via the call attributes. When the managed code calls into the unmanaged world, the parameters have to be marshalled, so it seems there could be a slight performance hit, but you'd have to do some testing to see if the marshalling is significant or not.
The easiest way to start is to make sure that all the C++ functionality is exposed as 'C' style functions. Make sure to declare the function as _stdcall.
extern "C" __declspec(dllexport) int _stdcall Foo(int a)
Make sure you get the marshalling right, especially things like pointers & wchar_t *. If you get it wrong, it can be difficult to debug.
Debug it from either side, but not both. When debugging mixed native & managed, the debugger can get very slow. Debugging 1 side at a time saves lots of time.
Getting more specific would require a more specific question.
You can also call into unmanaged code via P/Invoke. This may be easier if your code doesn't currently use COM. I guess you would probably need to write some specific export points in your code using "C" bindings if you went this route.
Probably the biggest thing you have to watch out for in my experience is that the lack of deterministic garbage collection means that your destructors will not run when you might have thought they would previously. You need to keep this in mind and use IDisposable or some other method to make sure your managed code is cleaned up when you want it to be.
Of course there is always PInvoke out there too if you packaged your code as DLLs with external entrypoints. None of the options are pain free. They depend on either a) your skill at writing COM or Managed C wrappers b) chancing your arm at PInvoke.
I would take a look at swig, we use this to good effect on our project to expose our C++ API to other language platforms.
It's a well maintained project that effectively builds a thin wrapper around your C++ library that can allow languages such as C# to communicate directly with your native code - saving you the trouble of having to implement (and debug) glue code.
If you want a good PInvoke examples you can look at PInvoke.net. It has examples of how to call most of win api functions.
Also you can use tool from this article Clr Inside Out: PInvoke that will translate your .h file to c# wrappers.