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.
The mono installation provided at mono-project.com comes packed with several libraries, such as gkt, making the installation quite large (~280MB or so).
Is there any way to provide users with an installation of "just" the mono environment? I am targeting Windows, MacOSX and Linux.
You might be looking for mkbundle which merges your application, the libraries it uses and the Mono runtime into a single executable image. See under "Bundles" in that page.
If you do this though, it may mean that you are distributing LGPL code with all that this implies.
If you are distributing your app for Mac OS X, there is also MonoMacPackager which offers more advanced support for this. I think they have done a bunch of work in the linker to really minimize the amount of Mono that you have to include. It will actually remove unused code from assemblies that you reference.
I am currently in a class that is developing applications in Objective-C and Cocoa. I was wondering if there was any way to build and compile Objective-C applications on Windows Vista. During class, we are able to use the Mac machines provided to us, but I was hoping to do some work outside of class, and I only have a Windows Vista machine available to me. I have installed GNUStep. I am looking for a GUI or an IDE that I could use. I have Eclipse, and I tried to install ObjectivEClipse, but that is only for a Mac machine too. Any other suggestions? Thanks.
The compiler is no problem, since gcc includes an Objectve-C frontend. You could simply install Cygwin and use it. the issue is about libraries.
The Cocoa system is very Apple proprietary; but it's a descendant from NeXTStep. For a while (when NeXT was even deeper in debts than Apple) it was named OpenStep, and available as a shell around the NT kernel. Around that time, the GNUStep project was started, and it seems it's still there.
Note, however, that any xxStep libraries gives only a NeXT-like GUI, very different from modern macs. Also, a lot of the newer capabilities are not only new GUI; but new APIs too and these won't be found there.
in short... it's easier to go with a mac.
GNUstep itself offers ProjectCenter, which is a take-off of Project Builder, the NeXTstep IDE that Xcode is derived from. It also maintains the Interface Builder knockoff GORM.
Also, you'll want to bear in mind that GNUstep is a bit limited compared to Cocoa (just because Apple has a whole paid professional development team working on Cocoa full-time and GNUstep does not) and GORM uses a different format from Interface Builder, so if you're taking a class, there may be some Cocoa assignments you won't be able to do with it.
Under the heading of desperation measures:
It's old school but if you have a friend with a mac, you could telnet into the mac and run the dev tools there. You would code in an editor on Vista and then up load to the mac to compile.
That would only let you see the results of command line apps but it would better than nothing.
If the macs in your school lab are accessible you could just screen share from your Vista box. That's another long shot.
Might be easier to beg, borrow or steal a Mac mini.
The Cocoa frameworks are only available on Mac. For anything else, you'll have to use GNUStep.
I was currently developing a desktop application in C# using mono and testing in SuSE and Windows. The concept doesn't matter much, but it is a "web lint" program that will scan a web site and return possible issues with security and/or cross browser compatibility. However, I want to be able to offer binaries for multiple platforms. Should I stay with Mono, or is there another platform that would give me a better availablility of platforms, such as on Macs, Windows, Linux, and others (possibly mobile platforms), and make it easier to port?
Well, your best bet always is to use a language that actually exists on all the platforms. That usually means Java, I think, though even perl has flavours for mobile platforms (depending on the mobile platform in question).
I do most of my cross-platform work in C and perl, but there are some headaches with C (lots of #ifdef's), and perl may not be on a mobile platform you care about (yet). You'll have to evaluate the languages/compilers/interpreters that are common to all the platforms you want to target and then choose from that list. Without knowing the full list of such platforms, we'll have a hard time telling you what to use, though Java has enough buzz-wordness to likely be a strong candidate.
Iff you know C++, Qt will cover many platforms.
C# and Mono is probably cross-platform enough for most desktop environments. The trick will be the "mobile platform" requirement.
Mobile operating systems are wildly diverse and there's not a lot you can do to generalize. Some have Java, like the Blackberry. C# may get you onto Windows Mobile-based platforms. iPhones do their own thing. You pretty much have to pick a platform and target that. That may end up informing your desktop platform choice.
Just stick to the Mono, make sure that you have Gendarme code inspector (FxCop for Mono) checking your code for portability issues, and you should be fine.
Java will run on Windows, Linux and Macs. Should be easy to transition from C# - use Apache HTTPClient for grabbing the web content you are scanning, and the scanning code should be more or less the same. However the downside is requiring the user to have the Java runtime installed.
Python is another option - you can build stand-alone executables for Windows, and it comes with most Linux distributions by default, and also Mac OS X (citation needed ;) ). This is a lot less hassle for Windows users (language is compiled into the executable, no other downloads required).
If mono runs on Mac OS X then surely that is a good platform as well?
It really depends what you want to do. For web development, if HTML/JavaScript is enough then stick with it. If you need more advanced stuff I would use ASP.NET with Mono (what you probably did) since you already know that. (You can use Visual Studio here.)
Another option might be (since you are a C# developer) to use Silverlight. That gives you Windows and Mac platforms covered and hopefully Moonlight will cover Linxu platform later. (You can use Visual Studio and Expression Blend here.)
If you need desktop application then Java is probably the easiest since you already know C#. But if you know C/C++ try to take a look at wxWidgets for example.
Why limit yourself to the traditional C#/Java? Have a look at Adobe AIR and Microsoft SilverLight
What would be the best way to write Objective-C on the Windows platform?
Cygwin and gcc? Is there a way I can somehow integrate this into Visual Studio?
Along those lines - are there any suggestions as to how to link in and use the Windows SDK for something like this. Its a different beast but I know I can write assembly and link in the Windows DLLs giving me accessibility to those calls but I don't know how to do this without googling and getting piecemeal directions.
Is anyone aware of a good online or book resource to do or explain these kinds of things?
Expanding on the two previous answers, if you just want Objective-C but not any of the Cocoa frameworks, then gcc will work on any platform. You can use it through Cygwin or get MinGW. However, if you want the Cocoa frameworks, or at least a reasonable subset of them, then GNUStep and Cocotron are your best bets.
Cocotron implements a lot of stuff that GNUStep does not, such as CoreGraphics and CoreData, though I can't vouch for how complete their implementation is on a specific framework. Their aim is to keep Cocotron up to date with the latest version of OS X so that any viable OS X program can run on Windows. Because GNUStep typically uses the latest version of gcc, they also add in support for Objective-C++ and a lot of the Objective-C 2.0 features.
I haven't tested those features with GNUStep, but if you use a sufficiently new version of gcc, you might be able to use them. I was not able to use Objective-C++ with GNUStep a few years ago. However, GNUStep does compile from just about any platform. Cocotron is a very mac-centric project. Although it is probably possible to compile it on other platforms, it comes XCode project files, not makefiles, so you can only compile its frameworks out of the box on OS X. It also comes with instructions on compiling Windows apps on XCode, but not any other platform. Basically, it's probably possible to set up a Windows development environment for Cocotron, but it's not as easy as setting one up for GNUStep, and you'll be on your own, so GNUStep is definitely the way to go if you're developing on Windows as opposed to just for Windows.
For what it's worth, Cocotron is licensed under the MIT license, and GNUStep is licensed under the LGPL.
You can use Objective C inside the Windows environment. If you follow these steps, it should be working just fine:
Visit the GNUstep website and download GNUstep MSYS Subsystem (MSYS for GNUstep), GNUstep Core (Libraries for GNUstep), and GNUstep Devel
After downloading these files, install in that order, or you will have problems with configuration
Navigate to C:\GNUstep\GNUstep\System\Library\Headers\Foundation1 and ensure that Foundation.h exists
Open up a command prompt and run gcc -v to check that GNUstep MSYS is correctly installed (if you get a file not found error, ensure that the bin folder of GNUstep MSYS is in your PATH)
Use this simple "Hello World" program to test GNUstep's functionality:
#include <Foundation/Foundation.h>
int main(void)
{
NSAutoreleasePool * pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
NSLog(#"Hello World!.");
[pool drain];
return;
}
Go back to the command prompt and cd to where you saved the "Hello World" program and then compile it:2
gcc -o helloworld.exe <HELLOWORLD>.m -I /GNUstep/GNUstep/System/Library/Headers -L /GNUstep/GNUstep/System/Library/Libraries -std=c99 -lobjc -lgnustep-base -fconstant-string-class=NSConstantString
Finally, from the command prompt, type helloworld to run it
All the best, and have fun with Objective-C!
NOTES:
I used the default install path - adjust your command line accordingly
Ensure the folder path of yours is similar to mine, otherwise you will get an error
Also:
The Cocotron is an open source project which aims to implement a cross-platform Objective-C API similar to that described by Apple Inc.'s Cocoa documentation. This includes the AppKit, Foundation, Objective-C runtime and support APIs such as CoreGraphics and CoreFoundation.
http://www.cocotron.org/
WinObjC? Windows Bridge for iOS (previously known as ‘Project Islandwood’).
Windows Bridge for iOS (also referred to as WinObjC) is a Microsoft open source project that provides an Objective-C development environment for Visual Studio/Windows. In addition, WinObjC provides support for iOS API compatibility. While the final release will happen later this fall (allowing the bridge to take advantage of new tooling capabilities that will ship with the upcoming Visual Studio 2015 Update),
The bridge is available to the open-source community now in its current state. Between now and the fall. The iOS bridge as an open-source project under the MIT license. Given the ambition of the project, making it easy for iOS developers to build and run apps on Windows.
Salmaan Ahmed has an in-depth post on the Windows Bridge for iOS http://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2015/08/06/windows-bridge-for-ios-lets-open-this-up/ discussing the compiler, runtime, IDE integration, and what the bridge is and isn’t. Best of all, the source code for the iOS bridge is live on GitHub right now.
The iOS bridge supports both Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 apps built for x86 and x64 processor architectures, and soon we will add compiler optimizations and support for ARM, which adds mobile support.
I have mixed feelings about the Cocotron project. I'm glad they are releasing source code and sharing but I don't feel that they are doing things the easiest way.
Examples.
Apple has released the source code to the objective-c runtime, which includes properties and garbage collection. The Cocotron project however has their own implementation of the objective-c runtime. Why bother to duplicate the effort? There is even a Visual Studio Project file that can be used to build an objc.dll file. Or if you're really lazy, you can just copy the DLL file from an installation of Safari on Windows.
They also did not bother to leverage CoreFoundation, which is also open sourced by Apple. I posted a question about this but did not receive an answer.
I think the current best solution is to take source code from multiple sources (Apple, CocoTron, GnuStep) and merge it together to what you need. You'll have to read a lot of source but it will be worth the end result.
I'm aware this is a very old post, but I have found a solution which has only become available more recently AND enables nearly all Objective-C 2.0 features on the Windows platform.
With the advent of gcc 4.6, support for Objective-C 2.0 language features (blocks, dot syntax, synthesised properties, etc) was added to the Objective-C compiler (see the release notes for full details). Their runtime has also been updated to work almost identically to Apple's own Objective-C 2.0 runtime. In short this means that (almost) any program that will legitimately compile with Clang on a Mac will also compile with gcc 4.6 without modification.
As a side-note, one feature that is not available is dictionary/array/etc literals as they are all hard-coded into Clang to use Apple's NSDictionary, NSArray, NSNumber, etc classes.
However, if you are happy to live without Apple's extensive frameworks, you can.
As noted in other answers, GNUStep and the Cocotron provide modified versions of Apple's class libraries, or you can write your own (my preferred option).
MinGW is one way to get GCC 4.6 on the Windows platform, and can be downloaded from The MinGW website. Make sure when you install it you include the installation of C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++. While optional, I would also suggest installing the MSYS environment.
Once installed, Objective-C 2.0 source can be compiled with:
gcc MyFile.m -lobjc -std=c99 -fobjc-exceptions -fconstant-string-class=clsname (etc, additional flags, see documentation)
MinGW also includes support for compiling native GUI Windows applications with the -mwindows flag. For example:
g++ -mwindows MyFile.cpp
I have not attempted it yet, but I imagine if you wrap your Objective-C classes in Objective-C++ at the highest possible layer, you should be able to successfully intertwine native Windows GUI C++ and Objective-C all in the one Windows Application.
Check out WinObjC:
https://github.com/Microsoft/WinObjC
It's an official, open-source project by Microsoft that integrates with Visual Studio + Windows.
If you just want to experiment, there's an Objective-C compiler for .NET (Windows) here: qckapp
You can get an objective c compiler that will work with Windows and play nice with Visual Studio 2008\2010 here.
open-c flite
Just download the latest source. You don't need to build all of CF-Lite there is a solution called objc.sln. You will need to fix a few of the include paths but then it will build just fine. There is even a test project included so you can see some objective-c .m files being compiled and working in visual studio. One sad thing is it only works with Win32 not x64. There is some assembly code that would need to be written for x64 for it to support that.
A recent attempt to port Objective C 2.0 to Windows is the Subjective project.
From the Readme:
Subjective is an attempt to bring Objective C 2.0 with ARC support to
Windows.
This project is a fork of objc4-532.2, the Objective C runtime that
ships with OS X 10.8.5. The port can be cross-compiled on OS X using
llvm-clang combined with the MinGW linker.
There are certain limitations many of which are a matter of extra
work, while others, such as exceptions and blocks, depend on more
serious work in 3rd party projects. The limitations are:
• 32-bit only - 64-bit is underway
• Static linking only - dynamic linking is underway
• No closures/blocks - until libdispatch supports them on Windows
• No exceptions - until clang supports them on Windows
• No old style GC - until someone cares...
• Internals: no vtables, no gdb support, just plain malloc, no
preoptimizations - some of these things will be available under the
64-bit build.
• Currently a patched clang compiler is required; the patch adds
-fobjc-runtime=subj flag
The project is available on Github, and there is also a thread on the Cocotron Group outlining some of the progress and issues encountered.
Get GNUStep here
Get MINGW here
Install MINGW
Install GNUStep
Then Test
If you are comfortable with Visual Studio environment,
Small project: jGRASP with gcc
Large project: Cocotron
I heard there are emulators, but I could find only Apple II Emulator http://virtualapple.org/. It looks like limited to games.
First of all, forget about GNUStep tools. Neither ProjectManager nor ProjectCenter can be called an IDE. With all due respect, it looks like guys from GNUStep project are stuck in the late 80-s (which is when NeXTSTEP first appeared).
Vim
ctags support Objective-C since r771 (be sure to pick the pre-release 5.9 version and add --langmap=ObjectiveC:.m.h to the command line, see here), so you'll have decent code completion/tag navigation.
Here's a short howto on adding Objective-C support to Vim tagbar plugin.
Emacs
The same applies to etags shipped with modern Emacsen, so you can start with Emacs Objective C Mode. YASnippet will provide useful templates:
and if you want something more intelligent than the basic tags-based code completion, take a look at this question.
Eclipse
CDT supports Makefile-based projects:
-- so technically you can build your Objective-C projects out of the box (on Windows, you'll need the Cygwin or MinGW toolchain). The only problem is the code editor which will report plenty of errors against what it thinks is a pure C code (on-the-fly code checking can be turned off, but still...). If you want proper syntax highlighting, you can add Eclim to your Eclipse and enjoy all the good features of both Eclipse and Vim (see above).
Another promising Eclipse plugin is Colorer, but it doesn't support Objective-C as of yet. Feel free to file a feature request though.
SlickEdit
SlickEdit, among other features of a great IDE, does support Objective-C. While it is fairly complex to learn (not as complex as Emacs though), I believe this is your best option provided you don't mind purchasing it (the price is quite affordable).
Additionally, it has an Eclipse plugin which can be used as an alternative to the stand-alone editor.
KDevelop
Rumor has it there exists a KDevelop patch (15 year old, but who cares?). I personally don't think KDevelop is feature-superior compared to Emacsen, so I wouldn't bother trying it.
The above also applies to Objective-C development on Linux, since all of the tools mentioned are more or less portable.
As of 2021, the GNUstep Windows MSVC Toolchain allows to integrate Objective-C code in any Windows app, including Visual Studio projects using LLVM/Clang. This includes support for Automatic Reference Counting (ARC) and Objective-C 2.0 features such as blocks.
The project includes the Foundation, CoreFoundation, and libdispatch libraries from GNUstep. It does currently not include any UI framework such as AppKit or UIKit, but it can be used to e.g. write a Windows-specific UI with cross-platform business logic written in Objective-C.