I am in the process of writing a .NET wrapper for legacy native c++ code. My strategy is to write a CLR class library that wraps the native code.
To test whether the class library is functioning properly, I created two console apps in separate solutions:
A C++ CLR console app
A C# console app
Both of these contain the same simple test code to exercise the class library.
Both apps build as expected. The C++ app runs just fine, but the C# app is giving me a FileNotFoundException when it tries to load my class library.
I have a constraint that forces me to use VS2008 and .NET 3.5. Everything is built with Win32 or x86 configurations.
For both console apps, I am using a project reference to the class library.
In each case, builds copy the dll (and the intermediate files) to the same directory where each app is built.
I tried using the fusion log viewer, but logs are disabled on my machine and I do not have administrator privileges.
Has anyone ever seen this before?
Can someone please point me to a good site that outlines the differences between the way C# and C++ CLR apps load assemblies?
Since this is my first attempt to bridge C++ and C# I assume I am just making a simple mistake somewhere, but I am stumped as to what that is.
I have trolled the internet (including many SO postings) but have yet to find exactly what I need.
Thanks in advance,
Judd
Related
Our project structure is like,
native.dll :- This contains pure native code written in c\c++.
This native.dll exposes some functions using *def file.
Wrapper Library(wrapper.dll compiled with .Net framework v4.0) :-
In order to use functionality of native.dll, a Wrapper lib(wrapper.dll)
is written in C++\CLI using :clr\oldsyntax. This wrapper has all
code of Interoperability and Marshalling.
Application(Console App v4.0) directly uses wrapper.dll to use functionality provided
by native.dll.
Now this project needs to run in .Net Core. This means we will have an
.Net Core application that will reference wrapper.dll that in turn will refer
native.dll.
I know this will not directly work. But the issue is whether .Net Core(CoreCLR) supports
C++\CLI (clr\oldsyntax) runtime environment ?
If no, what can be the possible solutions to this application work ?
whether .Net Core(CoreCLR) supports C++\CLI (clr\oldsyntax) runtime environment ?
As far as I know there is no plan to support C++/CLI with .NET Core.
If no, what can be the possible solutions to this application work ?
You can (should) provide a C API. Mono e. g. supports P/Invoke and .NET Core also supports P/Invoke (see also this Stack overflow question and this DllMap related ticket).
Update (2022-09-02): This answer is from 2016. See the other answers (e.g., this) for what is possible with recent .Net Core versions.
Officially announced eventually...
(next wish... support linux # .Net 5 ^^)
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/the-future-of-cpp-cli-and-dotnet-core-3/
C++/CLI will have full IDE support for targeting .NET Core 3.1 and higher. This support will include projects, IntelliSense, and mixed-mode debugging (IJW) on Windows. We don’t currently have plans for C++/CLI for targeting macOS or Linux. Additionally, compiling with “/clr:pure” and “/clr:safe” won’t be supported for .NET Core.
The first public previews for C++/CLI are right around the corner. Visual Studio 2019 16.4 Preview 1 includes an updated compiler with “/clr:netcore”
Updat: From replied of origin url:
"We are still working on the IDE and MSBuild integration, so I can’t share a sample project quite yet. Once it’s available, likely with 16.4 Preview 2 or 3"
(16.4 Preview1 cannot create C++/CLI with .NetCore project.)
191015
16.4 Preview2 Released.
I'v tried asp.net core 3.1 with c++/CLI dll, it works.
(need set plateform to x64 both asp.net core and c++/CLI dll)
.net Core team will only commit (now?) to supporting C++/CLI for Windows only.
The intention was to deliver it for .net Core 3.0. While I haven't found explicit mention of it yet in the release notes, C++/CLI support was a prerequisite for delivering WPF (windows-only), which is now supported in .net Core 3.0.
Support mixed-mode assemblies on Windows - #18013
This issue (#18013) will track progress toward supporting loading and running
mixed-mode assemblies on CoreCLR. The main goal is to provide support
for WPF and other existing C++/CLI code on .NET Core. Some of the work
will be dependent on updates to the MSVC compiler.
The github issue (#659) mentioned above by #Tomas-Kubes, Will CoreCLR support C++/CLI crossplat? - #659, is about cross-platform C++/CLI.
BTW, I am getting compiler warnings on "clr\oldsyntax" with VS2017/.net-4.7. So this compiler flag is already deprecated.
UPDATE: This isn't coming till .Net Core 3.1
Another potential solution (though obviously quite a difficult task) if you want to stick with C++ (i.e. expose an OO interface to .NET) might be to have a look at CppSharp from the mono project. It is able to expose native C++ code through an automatically generated C# wrapper. It supports Windows, Linux as well as OSX. However, I don't know if the generated code can be compiled to a .NET standard target (didn't try to). I can only suppose it would because the generated code does not use any fancy API (it is basically interop and marshalling code); and, by the way, it is also possible to customize the generation process (although, once again, probably not an easy task).
For those who are looking at this for general .Net Core stuff without specific clr parameters (as this is a high result on google) Microsoft have written a guide on how to port C++/CLI to .Net Core:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/porting/cpp-cli
Port a C++/CLI project
To port a C++/CLI project to .NET Core, make the following changes to the .vcxproj file. These migration steps differ from the steps needed for other project types because C++/CLI projects don't use SDK-style project files.
Replace <CLRSupport>true</CLRSupport> properties with <CLRSupport>NetCore</CLRSupport>. This property is often in configuration-specific property groups, so you may need to replace it in multiple places.
Replace <TargetFrameworkVersion> properties with <TargetFramework>netcoreapp3.1</TargetFramework>.
Remove any .NET Framework references (like <Reference Include="System" />). .NET Core SDK assemblies are automatically referenced when using <CLRSupport>NetCore</CLRSupport>.
Update API usage in .cpp files, as necessary, to remove APIs unavailable to .NET Core. Because C++/CLI projects tend to be fairly thin interop layers, there are often not many changes needed. You can use the .NET Portability Analyzer to identify unsupported .NET APIs used by C++/CLI binaries just as with purely managed binaries.
Build without MSBuild
It's also possible to build C++/CLI projects without using MSBuild. Follow these steps to build a C++/CLI project for .NET Core directly with cl.exe and link.exe:
When compiling, pass -clr:netcore to cl.exe.
Reference necessary .NET Core reference assemblies.
When linking, provide the .NET Core app host directory as a LibPath (so that ijwhost.lib can be found).
Copy ijwhost.dll (from the .NET Core app host directory) to the project's output directory.
Make sure a runtimeconfig.json file exists for the first component of the application that will run managed code. If the application has a managed entry point, a runtime.config file will be created and copied automatically. If the application has a native entry point, though, you need to create a runtimeconfig.json file for the first C++/CLI library to use the .NET Core runtime.
There are some more nuances but these are the actual steps to port
I have the source code of a dll project that Targets .NET Framework. And I'm current developing a Universal App, I want to reference that dll to my project but it is not applicable since the Universal App uses a .NET CORE and that dll is specifically targets .NET Framework.
I'm thinking that I can change the dll's Target Framework since I have the source code but I don't know how.
Or is there another way of solving this?
I don't think there's an automated way to convert the library directly (if anyone knows a way, would be more than happy to hear about it).
However, sine you have the source code you can manually move the code.
Create a new Universal Application Class library and start move the code from the old library in there.
Chances are, not everything will work, since there are pretty major differences between namespaces and APIs between .NET framework and .NET core but at least you'll know what you need to change. I would recommend a modular approach where you include portions of the library, make sure it compiles and so on.
I have a DLL written in C# and set for COM visibility. I have it setup as a side-by-side assembly and can successfully deploy the application to client PCs registration free. My question is related to the development PC. Is it possible to compile against the DLL in a similar registration-free manner or is registration required on the development machine? I have tried adding the DLL directly though the Project -> References menu and get an error stating "Can't add a reference to the specific file." The DLL is sitting in the same directory as the .vbp file and I have tried adding the DLL both with and without the client app manifest being present.
I have tried adding the DLL directly though the Project -> References menu
That adds a reference to a type library. A type library is a language-independent description of the types in a COM component, VB6 uses it to know how generate efficient code and to provide type checking and auto-completion. A type library is the exact equivalent of metadata in a .NET assembly.
Traditionally, and the way VB6 did it, the type library was embedded as a resource in a DLL. So you are probably used to picking a DLL in the dialog. That however doesn't work so well when the DLL is generated by C#, the type library can only be generated after the C# code is compiled. You have to pick the .tlb file in the VB6 dialog. The traditional way starts with the COM component being described in the IDL language, the type library can be generated before the code is compiled so can easily be embedded in the final DLL. It is technically possible to do it in C# as well, but the build steps are very laborious and painful, you essentially have to build the DLL twice with different build commands.
The type library for a C# library is normally generated in one of three ways:
Using Project + Properties, Build tab, "Register for COM interop" option. This requires VS to run elevated so it can write to the registry. You start VS elevated by right-clicking its shortcut and picking "Run as Administrator"
By running Regasm.exe, using the /tlb:filename option. An alternative for the 1st bullet and necessary if you don't want to run VS elevated for some reason. Using the /codebase option on your dev machine is also wise to make it work exactly like the 1st bullet and not require putting the DLL into the GAC with gacutil.exe
By running the Tlbexp.exe utility, the type library exporter for .NET assemblies. No registration is done, it only generates the .tlb file.
The first bullet is the normal choice and very desirable because you can never forget to update the type library this way. It is perfectly fine on a dev machine since you only really care about reg-free deployment on the user's machine. You probably got into trouble by not doing this anymore.
Using the 3rd choice is okay and more compatible with your goals, run Tlbexp from the Visual Studio Command Prompt. Just keep in mind that you have to do it again when you make changes to your C# code. Forgetting this once and losing clumps of head-hair trying to figure out why your C# changes don't seem to be effective or getting hard-to-diagnose error codes gives you lots of reasons to consider the 1st bullet again :) You can emulate the reg-free scenario by running Regasm.exe with the /uninstall option.
The big picture: what I am trying to accomplish is writing code in both C# and C++, to strike a good performance/productivity balance. It is not for code reuse reasons; I just want to be able to write new code in native C++ when it suits me, without committing to all its horrors.
I have a solution with 4 projects:
GUI: C# WPF interface
Logic_Cs: C# DLL, high level reference implementation of game logic
Logic_CLI: CLI DLL, interface between managed and unmanaged code
Logic_Cpp: C++ lib with native implementation
At some point, all of this was working just fine. In my GUI project I could switch between C#/C++ implementation merely by using the namespace from the appropriate DLL.
Then I apparently changed something, and now I can not get the namespace in the Logic_CLI project to be recognized in the GUI project, even though the Logic_Cs namespace still works just fine.
Yes, I added correct references, set dependencies, rebuilt AND recreated my entire solution structure from scratch; nothing helps.
I notice the C# DLL builds to a folder in its own project directory, while CLI builds to the solution directory; but the GUI application seems to look for the DLL's in their correct directory anyway, and im not getting any complaints about the DLL; it just refuses to import the namespace from it.
Earlier, when all this was working, I wasnt explicitly exporting anything from the CLI DLL; nor am I doing so for the C# DLL. It should 'just work', no?
We have a Powerbuilder 10 application that is using .Net COM assemblies. We are trying to embed the manifest in the PB application (to invoke COM assemblies without registration). The merged manifest file has added sections for dependecies on the .Net COM assemblies. We have tries various tools to inject the new manifest with different results
- using GenMan32 to inject truncates the application from 6MB to 45KB.
- using ResourceTuner, the file size looks okay, but trying to launch application gives "Fatal Disk Error".
Any suggestions on invoked .Net ComEnabled assembly from PB without registration?
Have you tried it with an external manifest and ensured that works? If an external manifest doesn't work, then the manifest information isn't correct.
Once you have a valid external manifest, you might try the Manifest Tool (MT.EXE) from the .Net SDK. It works well with true EXE files. As Terry noted though, the PB generated executable contains additional information that tools that manipulate the EXE need to respect or they will break it.
http://blogs.msdn.com/patricka/archive/2009/12/09/answers-to-several-application-manifest-mysteries-and-questions.aspx
This is more a redirection than an answer. One thing you need to be aware of is that PowerBuilder produces executables that do not follow standards for Windows executable files. Essentially they are a bootstrap routine to load the PowerBuilder virtual machine, plus a collection of class definitions (objects). The cases you've brought up are not the first I've heard of where utilities meant to modify executables don't work on PowerBuilder executables.
As for a positive contribution on what other directions to follow, I don't really know enough to give qualified advice. If it were me, I'd try to register the COM object if ConnectToNewObject() fails, but I've got no idea if that possible or if that route is a dead end.
Good luck,
Terry.