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.
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.
We have a large project mainly written in C# (services, multithreading etc.). However, the core number crunching algorithms are written in unmanaged C++ to be fast (OpenMP etc.).
Unfortunately, at the moment we have to do a lot of effort to exchange data between these two worlds. I.e., we have to write wrapping classes in C++/CLI for each of the C++ classes. For (virtually) any required setting (Properties) in the C#-"world" there is a copy in the C++ world (a header file) and an explicit conversion back and forth in the wrapper class. This architecture seems very inefficient and quite error-prone.
Primary question:
Is there a way to share a C#-class with properties somehow automatically in unmanaged C++? (we have to read and write!)
Secondary question:
Could you give any advice of how to improve the architecture in a case as described above. One consideration of ours was to completely switch to C++, but having to find appropriate libraries and write clean code for all the (system-)things we do in .NET at the moment does not feel good.
Many thanks for your help and best regards,
Jakob
I am dealing with similar issues at my work where my primary task is to write managed interfaces to certain high perfromance, low latency dlls, this involves simple cases where I have to wrap the native classes using simple c++/cli containing a raw pointer to the native class or more complex issues where the native code is a server side publisher and the managed code has to subscribe to it using delegates ie they have to be converted to native callbacks.
.NET under the hood is a sophisticated COM server as far as I know. It is possible to write .net assemblies with the ComVisible attribute set to true then it acts as a classic COM component and then it is possible to use it from the native C++ code as a COM component. The reverse that is to use native code from managed can be achieved using the DllImport attributes and all the Marshaling can be fine tuned by the various attributes like the StructLayoutAttribute (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.runtime.interopservices.structlayoutattribute.aspx) and the MarshalAsAttribute (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.runtime.interopservices.marshalasattribute.aspx)
I am also using sometimes the unsafe keyword as well. I have to deal with high performance code so in some cases it is that after profiling that I know which is the best solution. Whether it is the warpper class solution that you have mentioned or the classic COM way, or some kind of hybrid with some caching, object pooling etc.
Hope that helps. :)
Apologies if that looks a bit disorganised. It is very late here. :)
If you had to decide between C# and Managed C++, which would you choose and why?
Are there benefits of Managed C++ over C#? Which language do you prefer? What decisions would you make under what circumstances?
I would use managed C++ if I:
Needed to integrate with existing C/C++ code
Needed to port existing C/C++ code to .net
Needed to use .NET objects from C++
Needed to expose .NET object over COM in a more complex way than what .net makes easy
Needed to access hardware directly
Needed to call lots of unmanaged APIs
And already had some skills in C++, as the above tasks will need a experienced C++ programmer. Most of the time I would only consider managed C++ if the company already had a C++ code base, otherwise who is going to maintain the managed C++ code.
In other cases I would always choose C#. Even if I choose managed C++ for part of the system, I would try to write as much of the system as possible in C#.
Think of manage C++ as a bridge building kit for going between the
unmanaged world of C/C++ and the
managed world of .NET.
If you only need to call a few simple APIs from C#, then see pinvoke.net and this overview to find how to call them from C#, as a few lines of complex pinvoke code (prebuilt bridge) in C# is normally better then introducing C++ to a project that is not already using it.
what is the benefit of managed C++
over C#?
C++.net is useful for interacting with C++ and C code (that is, calling external C or C++ libraries, providing callback functions to external modules written in C or C++ and so on.
what language of both would you
prefer?
I would prefer C# for all situations except the one described above (interacting with C and C++).
C# is easier to write, simpler, and geared specifically to use the .NET platform. C++ can do it also, but it has all the complexity of the C++ language plus the extensions needed to use the .NET platform.
Unless you need to interact with native C++ or C code, you're better off using C# in most cases (that is, if you're coding for the .NET platform).
Normally I prefer C++, but when needing to code for .NET, it doesn't beat C#.
Managed C++ is good for interop with C++: for example, if you have a .NET application and your assembly has to interact with a native interface that comes as C++ .lib files (which I had more than once), or with a nice C++ API.
Example: Rithmic (not that you ever heard of them) until recently ONLY supported a C++ API. If you try to access them from C# - good luck ;) Managed C++ allows me to access their API and expose nice .NET objects.
Basically interop. Managed C++ REALLY shines in interop with low level C / C++ API's.
I used managed C++ when I needed to build up new NET component with much ofC++ unmanaged code inside.
I did a specific class used to Marshall some objects forward and back from old C++ code.
I've encountered a problem which was transparent in managed C++, but made a big headache in C# - I had to send a callback function to a C++ unmanaged library, that defined this callback as __cdecl. In C#, the default calling convention is __stdcall, and it is pretty compilcated to move a C# delegate from __stdcall to __cdecl (Actually it requires either a 'shim' unmanaged DLL to do so or using some reflection classes).
In C++, (C++.Net as well), it is just a simple attribute.
I haven't personally written, or read for that matter, too many lines of code in managed C++, but from what I have seen it looks too convoluted and patchy. That said, you might want to use managed C++ if you are really good in C++, and when learning the idioms and patterns of a new language would be too much of a risk.
Use C# if you are quite competent in it. If you are only getting started with C++ and C#, I think, C# is the easier route to take.
I would prefer C#, or specifically .NET, over C++ because of the extensive .NET standard library.
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.
Is is possible to make a GUI in C# but make the actually program in C or C++.
Like say I want to make a chat application. I want the interface to be in C#. But I want to make all the actual code in C.
Is this possible?
I found http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=P%2FInvoke&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=
does anyone have any better kind of information?
Absoluely! A c# winform can call into managed or unmaged C or C++ dll's. See P/Invoke for more information.
Edit: Turns out there's a good thread on P/Invoke on the front page. :)
You already have some answers here giving you the affirmative.
One suggestion tho: Premature optimization is the root of all evil (or something like that).
Unless you are creating a science project (doing something just to see if it can be done), just write the entire thing in C#.
Once complete, if you find you have parts of the project that are not performing well enough, rewrite those parts.
Basically, the part of the application that are slow are rarely where you thing they will be.
Incrementing on JP's totally correct previous answer, you can also expose your C++ code through COM interfaces and then consume them in C# via COM/Interop. Good luck, though.
Not only is it possible, it might very well be what you should do. There's no reason to rewrite all of your existing code for .NET.
In short, there are three ways to use existing (C/C++) code from C#: for easy access to a few simple APIs, P/Invoke works well. C++/CLI will give you the most flexibility. You third option is to use COM.
Everything you can do in C can be done in managed code. Why do you want to build one component in C# and the other one in C? Are you worried about sockets?
But to your question, you can absolutely do it as JP mentioned above.
Depending on how you want to distribute your application, you should consider the deployment requirements. If you have C++ modules, you will have a dependency on the C++ runtime libraries, in addition to the .Net framework. This is a non-issue if you are merely P/Invoking the Win32 API.
This may or may not matter to you, but it mattered to me - I got rid of the C++ layer in my app, and resorted to calling Win32 directly.