I have a Modelica external C function that calls a function that is in a .dll.
In the C function in the .dll I would like to make use of the ModelicaError() function. However when
#include ModelicaUtilities.h is included a number of errors occur.
What is the correct method for doing this?
I take it I'll need to link against an existing Dymola .lib, which one? What should DYMOLA_STATIC be defined as?
Or should I be compiling the .dll in such a way that these missing functions will be available after compilation with the model?
Any insight into this would be great, Thanks
From all what I know it is currently not possible in a tool-independent way to have shared objects (DLLs on Win) depending on ModelicaError (or any other functions of ModelicaUtilities). See https://github.com/modelica/ModelicaSpecification/issues/2191 for the open issue on the Modelica Language specification.
To use ModelicaError function in a dll you send the a pointer to the ModelicaError function. To do this from Dymola create a wrapper function that passes the pointer to the ModelicaError function to the dll function. For example MathLibraryWrapper:
#pragma once
#include "MathLibrary.h"
int fibonacci_next_int_wrap()
{
return fibonacci_next_int(&ModelicaError);
}
This calls the fibonacci_next_int function which is in MathLibary.cpp in the dll. This is modified to accept a pointer to the ModelicaError function.
int fibonacci_next_int(void(*mError)(const char *))
{
(*mError)("broken");
return (int)fibonacci_next();
}
If this is run it will immediately crash with "broken".
I am running GNU Radio 3.7.13.4 and working in GNU Radio Companion on Ubuntu 18.04
I have a very simple flowgraph where I have a source of type complex (I've tried both a signal source and a constant source) which I connect to a transcendental block (of type complex) and then output to a sink of type complex (I don't think anything after the transcendental block matters).
I have tried the transcendental block with functions "sin", "cos" and "exp". When I execute the flowgraph, I get the error:
ValueError: itemsize mismatch: sig_source_c0:0 using 8, transcendental0:0 using 16
The transcendental block is meant to take any cmath functions so I thought perhaps there were different function names for the complex and float cases? Something like "ccos" or csin" but I haven't seen any on the list of available functions.
I have seen similar questions where people are creating custom blocks and OOT modules and seeing this problem. They have often used the wrong datatype (numpy complex 32 instead of 64).
I am not using any custom blocks. This problem is with stock/shipped GR blocks.
Any help is appreciated!
I've got this UTF-8 module for Lua.
The thing is that if require() it, only the first two functions (charbytes and len) are available. The rest is unavailable, despite being defined.
I tested this with a very simple script:
utf8 = require("utf8")
print(utf8.len, utf8.sub)
It returns: function: 0xsomeaddress nil. Why is that?
Lua 5.3 has an utf8 module and it's already loaded, so require("utf8") actually doesn't do anything with the modules.
I notice in the MSDN documentation that there are multiple ways to declare a reference to a function in an external DLL from within a VB.NET program.
The confusing thing is that MSDN claims that you can only use the DllImportAttribute class with Shared Function prototypes "in rare cases", but I couldn't find the explanation for this statement, while you can simply use the Declare keyword instead.
Why are these different, and where would I appropriately use each case?
Apparently the Declare and DllImport statements are basically the same. You can use whichever you prefer.
Following is a discussion of the few points that may work a little differently in each, which may influence a preference for one over the other:
I started with an article from MSDN regarding Visual Studio 2003 titled Using the DllImport Attribute. (A bit old, but since the DllImport statement seems to have originated in .NET, it seemed appropriate to go back to the beginning.)
Given an example DllImport statement of:
[DllImport("user32.dll", EntryPoint = "MessageBox", CharSet = Unicode)]
int MessageBox(void* hWnd, wchar_t* lpText, wchar_t* lpCaption, unsigned int uType);
It says that if the EntryPoint value is left out, the CLR will look for the name of the function (MessageBox, in this case) as a default. However, in this instance, since a CharSet of Unicode was specified, the CLR would FIRST look for a function called "MessageBoxW" - the 'W' indicating a Unicode return type. (The ANSI return type version would be "MessageBoxA".) If no "MessageBoxW" were found, THEN the CLR would look for an API function actually called "MessageBox".
Current specifics about the DllImportAttribute class can be found here, where I viewed the .NET Framework 4 version: DLLImportAttribute Class
A key comment in the Remarks section of this .NET Framework 4 page is that:
You apply this attribute directly to C# and C++ method definitions; however, the Visual Basic compiler emits this attribute when you use the Declare statement.
So, in VB.NET, using the Declare statement causes the compiler to generate a DLLImportAttribute.
There is also an important note in this page:
The DllImportAttribute does not support marshaling of generic types.
So, it would appear that if you want to use a generic type, you'd have to use a Declare statement.
Next, I headed to the Declare statement information. A Visual Studio 2010 version (Visual Basic statement info) was here: Declare Statement
A key item here was this note:
You can use Declare only at module level. This means the declaration context for an external reference must be a class, structure, or module, and cannot be a source file, namespace, interface, procedure, or block.
Apparently, if you want to set up an API call outside of a class, structure, or module, you'll have to use the DllImport statement instead of the Declare.
The example Declare statement on this page is:
Declare Function getUserName Lib "advapi32.dll" Alias "GetUserNameA" (
ByVal lpBuffer As String, ByRef nSize As Integer) As Integer
Following that example is this little tidbit of information:
The DllImportAttribute provides an alternative way of using functions in unmanaged code. The following example declares an imported function without using a Declare statement.
followed by, of course, an example of DllImport usage.
Regarding Unicode vs ANSI results, according to this Declare page, if you specify a CharSet value (available in Declare, but not shown in the example above) the CLR will do the same type of automatic name search that DllImport does - for either Unicode or ANSI.
If you do not specify a CharSet value in the Declare statement, then you must make sure that your function name in the Declare is the same as the function name in the actual API function's header file, OR you must specifiy an Alias value that matches the actual function name in the header file (as shown in the example above).
I was not able to find any specific Microsoft documentation stating that either DllImport or Declare were preferred, or even recommended, over one another in any situation other than those noted above.
My conclusion, therefore, is:
Unless you need to place your definition in one of the places a Declare statement cannot be used, either technique will work fine,
and
if you're using DllImport, make sure you specify the CharSet value you want (Unicode or ANSI), or you may get unexpected results.
Declare is really an attempt to maintain a P/Invoke syntax which would be more familiar to Visual Basic 6.0 users converting to VB.NET. It has many of the same features as P/Invoke but the marshalling of certain types, in particular strings, are very different and can cause a bit of confusion to people more familiar with DllImport rules.
I'm not entirely sure what the documentation is alluding to with the "rare" distinction. I use DllImport in my code frequently from both VB.NET and C# without issue.
In general, I would use DllImport over Declare unless you come from a Visual Basic 6.0 background. The documentation and samples for DllImport are much better and there are many tools aimed at generating DllImport declarations.
In my opinion, since this keyword doesn't look deprected, etc. from what I searched, simply use compile-time keywords rather than attributes.
Also, when you use the Declare, you don't need to write the End Function. The advantage of that is that you can create a whole module of declarations of function imports line by line, with no need to pulute your code with DllImports and End Functions.
When you declare using the Declare keyword, the compiler treats this function as Shared anyway, so it can be accessed via other extenal objects.
But I think in the current VB.NET they're both addressed to the same target and no performance difference - no warranty on this one.
So my conclusion is: Do use the Declare instead of DllImport, especially reading what you quoted that Microsoft stated that it should be used in rare cases.
If you need to set one of the following options, then use DllImportAttribute attribute, else use Declare. From https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/w4byd5y4.aspx
To apply the BestFitMapping, CallingConvention, ExactSpelling,
PreserveSig, SetLastError, or ThrowOnUnmappableChar fields to a
Microsoft Visual Basic 2005 declaration, you must use the
DllImportAttribute attribute instead of the Declare statement.
It is unclear from the above reference only whether this applies to only "Visual Basic 2005" or not, as the above reference is from a .NET 4.5 article. However, I also found this article (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.runtime.interopservices.dllimportattribute(v=vs.110).aspx ) which is specific to the DllImportAttribute class in .NET 4.5 :
the Visual Basic compiler emits this attribute when you use the
Declare statement. For complex method definitions that include
BestFitMapping, CallingConvention, ExactSpelling, PreserveSig,
SetLastError, or ThrowOnUnmappableChar fields, you apply this
attribute directly to Visual Basic method definitions.
This tells you that the Declare option is VB.net syntactical sugar which is converted to DllImportAttribute at compile time, and outlines the exact scenarios when using DllImportAttribute directly is recommended.
I'm evaluating Server 2008. My C++ executable is getting this error. I've seen this error on MSDN that seems to have required a hot-fix for several previous OSes. Anyone else seen this? I get the same results for the 32 & 64 bit OS.
Code snippet:
HRESULT GroupStart([in] short iClientId, [in] VARIANT GroupDataArray,
[out] short* pGroupInstance, [out] long* pCommandId);
Where the GroupDataArray VARIANT argument wraps a single-dimension SAFEARRAY of VARIANTs wrapping a DCAPICOM_GroupData struct entries:
// DCAPICOM_GroupData
[
uuid(F1FE2605-2744-4A2A-AB85-1E1845C280EB),
helpstring("removed")
]
typedef struct DCAPICOM_GroupData {
[helpstring("removed")]
long m_lImageID;
[helpstring("removed")]
unsigned char m_ucHeadID;
[helpstring("removed")]
unsigned char m_ucPlateID;
} DCAPICOM_GroupData;
After opening a support case with Microsoft, I can now answer my own question. This is (now) a recognized bug. The issue has to do with marshalling on the server side, but before the server code is called. Our structure is 6 bytes long, but this COM implementation is interpreting it as 8, so the marshalling fails, and this is the error you get back. The workaround, until a Service Pack is released to deal with this, is to add two extra bytes to the structure to pad it up to 8 bytes. We haven't run across any more instances that fail yet, but we still have a lot of testing to do still.
We ran into the same error recently with a client/server app communicating via DCOM. It turned out that the size of a marshalled interface pointer going across the wire (i.e., not local) had changed (gotten bigger). You might like to check whether your code is doing any special marshalling via CoMarshalInterface or the like.