Related
I really like live smalltalk environment (though I only experimented a bit with Pharo), but there is one thing why I can't really use it for everyday development. It seems that it is not possible to create a native standalone executable from smalltalk system. The native standalone executable means to create a single executable file (PE on windows, ELF on linux, Mach-O on macosx), that a user could run by double clicking it without the need to install any additional execution environments. Am I missing something and it is in fact possible to create native standalone executable with smalltalk?
If we talk about Pharo specifically. I know that Pharo's environment includes efficient just in time compiler (that generates true native code from Pharo's VM bytecode), I know that the VM image can be stripped down by cutting of the code that my application won't ever need. So basically we already have almost everything (except the linker I guess) to be able to create native standalone executables. Cross-compilation shouldn't be a problem too, if we put all code generation stuff (for all target processors) in the image.
I know that in smalltalk world it is considered to be a good thing to deliver the whole VM image separately from the runtime environment, so the user can hack on software he/she is using. However I don't see any good reasons why it shouldn't be possible to deliver your smalltalk software as fully compiled native standalone executable. Could you please explain me why it is not a common thing to do in smalltalk world? Is there any good smalltalk implementation that allow to do it?
To sum all this. I dream of a live smalltalk environment, where I could develop and test my software, but then (when the software is actually ready for delivery) cross-compile it to native executables for windows, linux and macosx from my single development machine. That would be really awesome.
ironically enough there is one thing that an exe needs to be preloaded. Your OS. See the thing is that C/C++ can be so light because already your OS acts pretty much as the image acts with a ton of preloaded libraries. You need to waste several GBs of memory just get a simple calculator starting. Your OS is a collection of C/C++ libraries.
Things are not any prettier with other languages like python, java etc , even if the app is smaller, they still depend on this libs and they come will quite big libraries that would need installation whether your app use them or not.
Pharo and Smalltalk in general is diffirent case because they aspire to be a virtual OS by itself. The diffirence with a real OS , the smalltalk image is made to be hacked the easy way by a user .
Saying that you can rename the pharo executable, change its icon, disable to IDE tools inside Pharo so your user sees only the GUI of your App. Applications like Dr. Geo and Phratch already do this.
Compiling a Pharo project to a native executable will not make much difference, because a) Pharo is already compiled to a native executable b) you dont need to do that since Pharo is already standalone does not need to even be installed.
My advice is stop worrying about things that do not really matter and enjoy learning how powerful and fun Pharo can be.
Not Pharo, but native, compiled (through ANSI C or its own JIT) smalltalk [applications] (with ability to load pre-compiled DLLs or [JIT-]compile code on demand):
Smalltalk/X
http://www.exept.de/en/products/smalltalk-x.html
or (unofficial enhanced development version):
Smalltalk/X JV branch - https://swing.fit.cvut.cz/projects/stx-jv/
Nearly completely open-source. Everything except librun (core runtime - memory management, JIT, etc.) and stc (smalltalk-to-c) compiler is already open-source. Claus Gittinger / Exept also promised/confirmed they would release remaining sources were they to stop further development (AFAIK, those parts are closed only because of concerns of existing clients).
I highly recommend everyone to check it out, it is a wonder such a great implementation is so little known.
You might also check out Dolphin from Object Arts.
It is windows only, but the very best IDE, bar none.
If you do anything in Smalltalk, you should buy a copy.
(They also have a free non-commercial version, but you will
want to support the kind of craftsmanship behind it by buying
the Pro version. An absolutely kick-ass product, IMHO).
It will produce a standalone exe, if that's what you want.
I made an exe of a medium-featured wiki with it - the exe was
less than 1 MB. That is not a typo.
-Jim
The problem is that Pharo, in that case, cannot be compared to any native compiler like C, C++ or others, but more like java, python, ruby and other languages with a Virtual Machine around.
In these languages, you produce jars, eggs or gems to distribute your project.
In Pharo, you produce a "production image" following technics you already mentioned. But nothing prevents you to deliver an artefact including also the PharoVM (it is 2m large, after all), and you can prepare your apps to detect and open your production image (without having to ask for it).
It is about as practical with Smalltalk as with other languages: not very much. As soon as you create a somewhat larger application, you start depending on other libraries/applications being installed. If you compile them statically with the application, you have now created a much larger application that takes longer to download, and needs to be updated at least as soon as a security problem is found in one of the dependencies. If not, your application is no longer double-click startable.
There are two directions for solutions: web applications, and installers and package managers.
Squeak still maintains its one-click installer, allowing the same set of files to work on windows, mac and linux. Pharo used to have that too, but moved to having separate builds. The need hasn't been so large that the one-click build has been reinstated. It is mostly seen as useful to be able to carry around a cross-platform environment on an usb-stick. With the move to the 64-bit spur vm the dependency problems will lessen as more of the needed libraries will come pre-installed on those platforms.
Dolphin Smalltalk can produce a standalone .exe for Windows.
This is a key feature of the Pro version.
Your dream has been around since the mid-80's and it is called Smalltalk/X.
trying to build documentation for a project.
the project uses the doxygen product which rpm contains the /usr/bin/docsetutil binary? Doxygen 1.8.4 generated output Makefile is looking for it...
thx.
That binary is part of the OS X / macOS developer toolchain. On my OS X 10.9.5 system, it exists at /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/usr/bin/docsetutil.
I don't know of a workaround for other platforms, so you'll probably want to have a Makefile or a separate Doxyfile or something that just doesn't attempt to build the docset unless you're on an OS X system. And just build the docsets on a Mac, if you have access to one.
It will be interesting to see if a Free replacement docsetutil for GNU/Linux ever pops up, now that the Dash developer has opened the door for offline documentation browsers on other platforms to use his docsets (e.g., Zeal). As far as I know (and I don't know much), the Dash web site at kapeli.com is acting as the central repository at the moment.
ref: I had the same question, and discovered the answer in this otherwise unrelated bug report for the TYPO3 CMS. I'm leaving this answer here for other folks who find this by way of a search engine.
I'm prepping an application for submission to the Windows Store that utilises the Bing Maps API - as such, the app has to be compiled to target specific architectures. Whilst there is a guide to submission, it's not clear how to submit both Arm and x86 configurations of the same app. Is it even possible, or will there have to be in the store twice?
When you select the option to create your app package from the Visual Studio Store menu, you get a choice to select the package architecture. There are 4 options: Neutral, x86, x64, ARM.
If you select Neutral, then it builds a single package for "Any CPU" that you can upload to the Store. If you select x86, x64 and ARM, it will build a package for each of these configurations, and you will have to upload the corresponding packages for the architectures you wish to support.
Additionally, if you're building to submit to the Store, make sure to always select Release for each of the selected architectures.
There are cases where some references don't support building using a Neutral architecture. The Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Package is an example.
Taken from here:
The process of engineering for ARM was different for each language (JavaScript, C++, and C#/VB), based on existing implementation details
of the various runtimes and compilers.
JavaScript uses a JIT compiler, so platform targeting is taken care of at runtime. Therefore Metro style apps using JavaScript are
platform neutral, and you can write once to run on x86/x64/ARM.
C# and Visual Basic are also abstracted from hardware differences. They compile to MSIL, which is platform neutral. Therefore, Metro
style apps using C# or Visual Basic can be compiled once to run on
x86/x64/ARM.
C++ is close to the metal, and compiled to the machine language for
the platform that you’re targeting. This offers developers full
control, but also requires that they specify the hardware where the
app will be supported.
The essence of it is that pure .net or pure html/js will run on any architecture without problems. If you want C++ then you will need to compile your app once for each supported architecture. My understanding is that you can create an app package which contains installers for multiple architectures in this case.
The post here has some good details on packaging your app for multiple architectures. Here are a few highlights:
7.In the Select the packages to create and the solution configuration mappings section, select the check box for each build configuration
for which you want to create a package.
The build configurations grid lists the possible platform
architectures of the package (that is, Neutral, ARM, x64, and x86). In
each row, a combo box displays the combination of the current Solution
Configuration and Architecture choices that are relevant for that
row’s architecture. The check box for the default platform is set to
the current, active project platform. The combo box for the Neutral
row show the Solution Configuration combinations that contain AnyCPU
as the project’s platform. If no Solution Configuration combination is
relevant, the entire row for that platform is unavailable for
selection. One package is produced for each configuration that you
specify.
8.For each build configuration that you specified, choose the Solution Configuration that you want to build.
When you package an app for the Store, you can specify Release or any
custom solution configuration that you’ve created.
A package will be created for each build configuration that you
specified.
From here we get this:
7.Click Packages to upload your app's packages.
And finally from the previous link:
Signing and publishing
After your app passes the certification testing, its packages are
digitally signed to protect them against tampering after they have
been released. When this phase begins, you cannot cancel your
submission.
Note It might take some time for your app's listing to appear in
search results. This is normal. Also, you can't change a release date
after you submit the app to the Windows Store, but you can cancel the
release, update the release date, and re-submit.
Overview: During the build process you specify all architectures you want your app to work for and it creates a package for each. During the submission process you select all the packages you built for that app. When submitting you app this way only one version will show up in the store.
If you build just a HTML5/javascript Windows Store app, it work on all version (ARM, x86 and x84)
If you create something web with bing api. No worry about what platform doesn't work.
Answer is here: http://developer.android.com/google/play/publishing/multiple-apks.html
TLDR:
Go to your Google Play app developer console
Choose your app
Select APK on the left
Turn on Advanced Mode
Upload your ARM apk
Upload your x86 apk
Google will figure out the rest
Our C++/QT desktop application for Mac, Windows and Linux needs an installer. I'd rather we have a single installer for all three platforms. I do know it's a bit tricky, I guess what I wanted ask is if a framework already exists for that (Java maybe?).
I'd really like to avoid having to write three different installers.
The link that Kyle mentions is pretty comprehensive, but I wanted to provide a bit more of information about InstallBuilder for Qt (Disclaimer, I am one of the developers) since most of the cross platform installation programs referenced there are Java-based. This requires bundling a JRE, etc. and adds a significant overhead that is not required with a Qt-based installer, like ours. It is able to generate wizard-like executable installers for all platforms from a single project file as well as native packages such as DEB and RPM. If you ship your software in DVDs, you can create a single multi-platform DVD that shares data across platforms but still have native launchers.
Having said this, since your application is Desktop-oriented, for the particular case of OS X if it does not require complex installation you may be better off creating a .app file and package it inside a DMG. Users can then drag the file directly to the Applications folder.
Finally, I wanted to mention that InstallBuilder is commercial, but we offer free licenses for open source projects and discounts for small development firms.
IzPack rocks: http://izpack.org. It is truly crossplatform, very lightweight, easy to master, and produces excellent results.
After fully integrating both Izpack and InstallBuilder into our builds (using Windows, OSX, and Ubuntu 14 build servers for testing purposes), I will say I believe InstallBuilder is well worth the money (and free for open source projects according to wojciechka).
Izpack is a bit slow, a bit large if you need to package a JVM, and has an amateurish user interface. Version 5 (release candidate 3) was also not generating uninstallers properly. That said, as long as you use a 4.x version and require a JVM anyway, it may be enough for your needs. The extension interface is not terribly easy to deal with, but is almost infinitely flexible. The Windows installers do not register with the Control Panel uninstaller list.
InstallBuilder has a great, fast UI in the produced installers and has a serviceable UI for creating installers. The XML is pretty easy to deal with, too. Downloads are about as small as possible. It also includes nice hooks for doing all sorts of custom stuff easily. The only slightly annoying thing I ran into was that the Windows server required that I manually add some configuration to set executable bits on the other systems' packages (other systems didn't require this configuration).
Note: I was using the three-platform version of standard InstallBuilder (not InstallBuilder for QT).
As good developers we keep our code as standard compliant as possible to help in porting between platforms. But what tools are available that help us build the code in a uniform way across multiple platforms.
*nix family has make but Windows needs nmake.
I have read about SCons but never used it in anger. What is your favorite build tool, why do you find it effective and are there any limitations (i.e. platforms with bad support etc).
Cross platform IDEs as well.
cmake for c/c++ environments is good. http://www.cmake.org/
I personally use ant, rake, and maven2. I have used ant the most and find it great for several reasons:
Because it is java it works on lots of platforms (without changing any scripts)
The build files are written in XML and fairly easy to write
There are lots of 3rd party extensions available for it and it is easy to write plugins for
we do extreme cross development, and our code runs on linux, windows ce, windows 2K, nucleus and uCOS-II.
since each environment uses different 'make' methodology (out nucleus customer, for example, require us to compile via code-warrior GUI).
i used ANT combined with perl for about 2 years, but this lead the build script to total non-maintainability.
now we moved to use python, which increase the maintainability of the scripts.
bottom line, i did not find a ready-made tool, and had to build my own. maybe, when i have some time (2017 ?) i will pack my scripts and distribute them ....
If you're in the Java world, there are quite a few tools which are cross-platform. Apache Ant and Maven are both build tools which will run on any platform which has Java available for it.
Cruise Control (continuous integration tool) also works on Windows and Linux (it's written in Java as well).
I haven't had any real issues with the core tools, the only problems I've sometimes had have come from things external to the build process, i.e. publishing artifacts - this will vary between systems so I've found there's no single way of setting it up.
For C/C++ development, I've found that bakefile works well. The fairly large wxWidgets project, a cross-platform cross-platform utility and UI library, uses it for their build file generation.
Bakefile is cross-platform, cross-compiler native makefiles generator. It takes compiler-independent description of build tasks as input and generates native makefile (autoconf's Makefile.in, Visual C++ project, bcc makefile etc.).
Bakefile's task is to generate native makefiles, so that people can keep using their favorite tools. There are other cross-platform make solutions, but they either aren't native and require the user to use unfamiliar tools (Boost.Build) or they are too limited (qmake).
You can use gmake on Windows as well with cygwin/minGW or build your windows stuff on Linux.
http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com/2009/05/mingw-cross-for-linux.html
There are tools like Opus Make or MKS Toolkit that offers multiplatform and support. If you have an existing codebase of make script, could be easier migrate to one of there. I suspect you may hunt for similar tools in advertising of DDJ magazine.
We've been running a Java environment for Linux, Windows and the Mac for the last 18 months.
Maven 2 drives our builds, it's pretty easy to get things consistent here. Where M2 plugins don't dare to tread, we use small Ant scripts.
IDE-wise we're using Eclipse & IDEA - both, of course, multi-platform.
Testing - JUnit, Fitnesse, Fest - all nicely multi-platform.
Release scripts are written in Ruby. There's a bit more trouble with Windows here, but a function to convert paths as necessary generally does the trick.
TeamCity does CI. We've actually migrated this from Windows to Linux and encountered no errors at all, very nice package.
We did use GWT for a while and this did cause us large amounts of pain. Be careful if you swing that way.