Is it safe to use OpenTK functions from within a MonoGame project? Do I lose any portability?
The short answer is no and yes respectively. You shouldn't make a habit of using OpenTK functions from within a MonoGame project because you could lose portability.
MonoGame uses OpenTK under the hood to provide support for some (probably most) of it's platforms. However, there's no good reason to believe that all future platforms will support OpenTK or that MonoGame will always use it.
I can see 10 supported platforms based on the solution files on github and at least one of them uses Windows DirectX instead of OpenGL. Although, there is an OpenGL version as well.
That said, if you really need to use OpenTK in your project directly, you could do it the same way MonoGame implements multi-platform support. If you poke around the code for a bit you'll notice various defines for platform specific code like so:
#if ANDROID
// your code here
#endif
#if DIRECTX
// your code here
#endif
#if WINDOWS_PHONE
// your code here
#endif
At the end of the day, you just need to weigh up the risks depending on what platforms you would like to support and the effort you're willing to go to do so. Good luck! :)
Related
My scenario: trying to port a small part of an application created by our company from native code (ObjC for iOS / Java for Android) to C-Sharp. The project will interact with our webservices. Goal of this project is figuring out how feasible it is to port our whole app to Mono.
To create URLs, I'd like to use String.Format(). I thought it'd be a wise idea to put this 'service layer' inside a Portable Class Library (PCL) since I don't expect this code to change across platforms. Sadly, it seems the String library is not available for PCLs.
So my question is the following:
I think the main advantage of PCLs over "normal" libraries is that they shouldn't need a recompile for different platforms. Is this assumption correct?
This experience makes me think that for the moment PCLs are rather limited. Should I try to stick with PCLs and work around these kinds of issues, or might it be better to stick with a "normal" library for now? --- I'll assume the "normal" library has more functionality exposed.
You can use PCLs currently across many platforms, but it does require some small hacks to your setup.
These hacks are listed in http://slodge.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/cross-platform-winrt-monodroid.html
Once you've got those working then the functionality available is quite broad - and it definitely includes things like String.Format
For the situations where the PCL profile is not broad enough, then you can use several techniques for extending them - see http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dsplaisted/archive/2012/08/27/how-to-make-portable-class-libraries-work-for-you.aspx . The technique I generally use is to use MvvmCross Plugins - which are basically PCL interfaces with platform specific implementations. But these plugins are generally at the level of 'make bluetooth work' rather than at the level of String.Format
I do lots of PCL work across WinRT, WP, WPF, MonoTouch and Mono for Android - see http://slodge.blogspot.co.uk/p/mvvmcross-quicklist.html for lots of links to PCL work.
It's true that Xamarin have recommended not using PCLs for a couple of years, but that situation has now changed and the official support for PCLs is under way - see http://slodge.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-future-is-portable.html
From a development perspective - especially from the point of view of using refactoring and testing tools - I don't hesitate to recommend you use PCLs now... especially for operations at the String.Format level. However, each project is unique... so it's not always the right answer.
One important note: right now it's better to not reuse the PCL binary files across to the MonoTouch platform - for now, build your portable libraries against the specific MonoTouch library platform. See http://slodge.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/almost-portable-binaries.html?m=1
Perhaps you want to look at the efforts other who have got PCLs working to a considerable degree with monotouch and monodroid.
For example see http://www.slideshare.net/cirrious/mvvm-cross-going-portable . You'll also find instructions on how to setup PCL support for MVVMCross here http://slodge.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/mvvmcross-vnext-portable-class.html .
Xamarin has recently committed to providing far greater PCL support rather than some of the workarounds that people have been having to make, but it is worth the effort.
Are there frameworks/generators for producing iOS code from any other language?
A dynamic language like JavaScript, ruby or Python are preferred. Googling for iOS code generators was largely fruitless.
The problem with systems like PhoneGap is that their output is a full-fledged application. What I need to produce is a library (.a & .h file eventually) that other Objective-C developers can reuse in their projects.
RubyMotion may or may not do what you want. I haven't seen much about the practicalities of it yet, but I'm thinking since it's statically compiled chances are good that it can produce libraries that can be simply linked into Objective-C projects. One might need another tool to produce the header files.
Of course, this is all speculation.
I think the best solution for what you're looking for is Titanium. It has its own sdk (in JavaScript), a complete IDE and allows you to have one codebase for all major platforms (iOS, Android included). What it's really awesome is the fact that it actually generates native code (a valid XCode project or a Java one for Android). It's also free and open source. Definetely worth a look.
I've never seen code generators, but there are a variety of "spoofs" as it were.
http://xamarin.com/monotouch - iOS on C#
http://phonegap.com/ - iOS on HTML, CSS , Javascript
http://ipodtoucher55.blogspot.com/2010/06/how-to-create-iphone-apps-in-flash-cs5.html - one of several tutorials for flash on iOS
I've seen links to python libraries and I think java too.
When it comes down to it though, they're all work arounds, not direct development.
I have a .NET application, which I want to port to OSX. Up to now I used a DirectShow DLL for WebCam handling. Can I use an Objective-C DLL for Mono? How? I'm a newbie on Mac. Is there an existing (WebCam handling) solution for this? Is there a better solution?
You want to use the QTKit framework to do this, in particular you can use the QTCaptureView as a reusable NSView that you can embed in an existing window or in an application to do the actual video capturing.
I have just added support for capturing to the MonoMac bindings a few minutes ago after I saw your question, so you will need to do a little bit of work.
Steps:
Install Mono, MonoDevelop and the MonoMac addin as described here: http://mono-project.com/MonoMac
Download the latest sources for MonoMac and MacCore from Github: http://github.com/mono/maccore and http://github.com/mono/monomac
Update the MonoMac.dll to the latest version, by going into the monomac/src directory and typing "make update"
At this point you should be able to use the QTCaptureView in your MonoMac applications like any other NSView. A tutorial showing the use of the API in Objective-C is here:
http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/QTKitApplicationTutorial/BuildingaSimpleQTKitCaptureApplication/BuildingaSimpleQTKitCaptureApplication.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40008155-CH8-SW1
You can just use the equivalent versions in C#
I'm not sure what you mean by "an object-c dll for Mono".
Your absolute best approach is to learn the platform you're targeting and port only the logic and general architecture.
To access cameras, microphones, line-ins, etc. on Mac OS X, use QTKit (Quicktime Kit). It's mind-numbingly simple to set up a web cam view, record to files, grab frames, etc. It's built in and designed to make this sort of thing mostly drag-and-drop for developers.
MonoMac is just one alternative. There are Monobjc, CocoSharp, NObjective, MObjc / MCocoa and ObjC# (I cannot choose between them). Theese are all "bridges" between Mono and Cocoa, what mean you can use Cocoa API in Mono application. But I don't want to use the API directly. I just want a dinamically linked library, which provide me some function for WebCam handling (as I said, I did this up to this time on Windows). In other words: I need a wrapper in Mono for QTKit.
PS: If I rewrite the application in object-c that means several months, and double work in the future when the application will grow. I love object-c but I hate to work unnecessary.
I tried the accepted code in XCode, and when I tried to port to Monodevelop, several classes are missing, eg. QTCaputureSession, QTCaputreDeviceInput, CVimagebuffer.
(Sorry, I cannot edit my previous messages, this is another account.)
First of all, is this possible?
If so:
What challenges would I encounter in making an XCode imitation for iPhone/iPod development for Windows or Linux?
I was thinking about using gcc as the actual compiler for the objective-c and (VB).NET for the IDE. Will that work?
It doesn't need to compile to iPhone OS until it is to be tested on the device or submitted to the app store. Perhaps it will be easier to compile to the local OS format (Windows or Linux) until "prime-time".
Is this concept possible? Comments? Ideas of how to implement?
If you wanted to support all of UIKit and Cocoa Touch, the problems would be insurmountable. You'd spend 2 years trying to get off the ground and then give up, while everyone else had fun developing apps for the iPhone and iPad and other devices. You would regret even trying it.
But if you wanted to create your own framework for making iPhone apps, built immediately on top of OpenGL, it might be possible. You would create a simulator that renders to an OpenGL view, and the final app would also render everything in an OpenGL view, touching none of UIKit. You would use pure C, or some robust cross-platform language like Lua, compiled or even interpreted. Incidentally, that's more or less how the Corona framework does it: built on top of OpenGL, touches little of the iPhone SDK, uses compiled Lua. They developed their own simulator, which only runs on OSX, but could probably relatively easily be ported to Linux.
You could even use Objective-C as the language, and make available a carefully chosen subset of the Cocoa API's by using (the iPhone compatible parts of) GNUstep Base. Then users could use standard classes like NSString.
Still, all of this is mostly interesting as a thought experiment, unless you got a team together to work on this as an Open Source project. It's harder than you think. Your simulator wouldn't be able to emulate the way that memory warnings are generated on the iPhone, for example.
If someone wants to develop iPhone apps on Linux, it makes more sense to just write the whole app in C/C++ using OpenGL, and then basically just smack that code onto a vanilla iPhone OpenGL project. That's the fastest path. The next possibility would be to use another language, which is also not too hard. But an "iPhone IDE" on top of that would be little more than putting an iPhone-like frame around the OpenGL view in Linux.
Actually, Felixyz touched on something your should take a look at. See: http://www.gnustep.org/ . They have binaries for just about every variant of *nix, OS X, and windows. The site claims "GNUstep seeks to be source code compatible with Cocoa and OpenStep, it can thus be used to develop and build cross-platform applications between Macintosh (Cocoa), Unix and Windows." It would be a good jumping off point for such a project,
I doubt all OSX's functionality is covered by GNUStep, but it's a start.
I'd imagine to develop iPhone/iPod apps on an alternate platform, you'd need to get Apple's includes (Legality is likely to be an issue), and apply all their toolchain patches, plus a million other things I'm probably overlooking.
What would be a better project is implementing the missing functions in GNUStep to support OSX apps seamlessly under the host platform. Maybe then you could run xcode native on your desired OS.
I've been developing for Windows and *nix platforms for quite some time, and am looking to move into Mac development. I am tossing up between using ObjC/Cocoa and C++/Qt4.5.
The C++/moc semantics make more sense to me, and improving knowledge in Qt seems like a sensible thing to do given that you end up with a skill set that covers more platforms.
Am I likely to handicap my applications by skipping Cocoa?
The sample Qt applications look pretty Mac-native to me, but they are quite simple so potentially don't tell the whole story. Are there other pros to the Xcode way that Qt doesn't have, such as packaging, deployment, etc.?
Here's an easy way to answer it:
If you were developing a Windows app with .NET or MFC, would you handicap your applications by using Qt? If the answer to that is yes, then the situation is likely to be the same on the Mac.
A few negatives I can think of off the top of my head:
Licensing
Qt apps, while good, are not completely a native UI experience and there's things a native UI designer can do in Cocoa which boggle the mind. While I can't be sure that all the same functionality isn't available in Qt, I doubt it.
Qt is always a little behind. If Microsoft or Apple come out with a great new technology, you have to wait for the Qt developers to update Qt.
However, with all that said, only you can determine the business value of using Qt. If you think cross-platform development is going to be a major part of your development, then Qt might be worth it, despite the issues mentioned.
Ask yourself: how many of the best Mac applications that you know of use Qt instead of native Cocoa?
For our robotic systems, we originally wrote our control software in C++ using the cross-platform wxWidgets library (we avoided Qt due to some licensing concerns), because we felt that we had to target Windows, Linux, and Mac platforms for our end users. This is what we shipped for over a year until I started tinkering with Cocoa.
Right away, the thing that most impressed me was how quickly you could develop using Cocoa. Eventually, we decided to drop support for Linux and Windows and rewrite our entire control applications in Cocoa. What had taken us years to put together in C++ required only three months to completely reimplement in Cocoa.
Aside from the "lowest common denominator" interface issues that others have pointed out, the rapid development allowed by Cocoa has become a competitive advantage for our company. Our software has advanced far more quickly since our conversion to Cocoa, and it has allowed us as a new company with one developer to pull even with 10-year-old competitors that have 20-man development teams. This appears to be a common story in the Mac development space, where you see a lot of small teams who are able to create products that compete with those of much larger companies.
As a final note, using Cocoa gives you the ability to stay on top of the new APIs Apple is continually rolling out. We're now working on a new control interface that will make heavy use of Core Animation, something that would be painful to deal with using Qt.
I'm currently developing both with QT (actually PyQT, but it makes no difference to your question) and native Cocoa app. For me it's no brainer, I'd chose Cocoa. It's really worth time to explore Cocoa in general, there are many great concepts within the Cocoa framework, and Objective-C 2.0 as well.
I'd use Qt if you want this to be a crossplatform application.
You can have a look at the QMacCocoaViewContainer class. It acts as some kind of wrapper for generic Cocoa views, so you can also have Cocoa elements which are not officially supported by Qt.
Of course this means learning a little about Cocoa and Objective C and how a Cocoa UI would need to look like. But if you already know Qt well and if it’s not like your application is all and only about the GUI this could be a good way to go.
And don’t forget about the QMacStyle::WidgetSizePolicy or you won’t understand why your tables come out so huge.
Obviously, the best option is to use a cross platform suite that supports native widgets.
With QT4 you can build your base user interface. Then just add native support for your specific target platform.
Sure, Cocoa has a lot of fancy stuff (and you can still use them trough QT4), but let me be clear. I see a lot of fancy Apps on the AppStore, pretty ones, but most of then are just crap, expensive.. what ever. I really missed my Kate text editor, my okular viewer, my krita drawing software... those are just better than the commercial and expensive alternatives and are free. so i just tweak the source code a little bit too have a REAL native and great experience.
What if i have to use a linux app on my main computer with is a mac os x? or windows? or whatever? only?
For example, why on earth i have to buy a expensive ,fancy but far less featured image editor software for my mac like pixelmator when i can use a full featured real image manipulation software like Gimp? YES Gimp is gtk2 based which is a pain on any platform, specially on Mac because is really ugly. Gimp should be ported to QT4. Inkscape should be ported to QT4 too, and it would feel so great.
Is so simple to do.. gosh!
http://doc.qt.nokia.com/4.7-snapshot/demos-macmainwindow.html
Even you can add support for the the new native lion fullscreen feature, unified title and toolbar menus, etc
I , as a user, i really care about efficient, featured, good and cross platform apps, i don't really care about developer's convenience or laziness .
I do a lot of cross-platform development (Mac, Windows, Linux), and for some projects use Qt. It is a fine framework, and provides a rich class library. If you need to deploy on multiple platforms, cannot afford to spend the time/effort on platform-specific front-ends, or the "generic" support for each platform is sufficiently good, then use Qt.
However, Qt inevitably suffers in some ways from the lowest common denominator syndrome, and sometimes does not feel quite native enough. There are also certain features that are either difficult to support, or are simply not provided in the Qt libraries. So if you can afford the time and effort, or your app really demands the attention to detail and fit & finish, then developing separate front-ends may be worth it.
In either case, you ought to be writing your back-end (aka domain) code in a platform-neutral and front-end neutral manner. This way, the front-end is easily replaced, or modified between platforms.
You could always start with a Qt front-end and go for a quick time to market, then develop a native front-end down the line.
In practice, I've noticed that a Qt app on Windows looks most "native", while on Mac there are certain subtle telltale signs that make it look/feel not quite right. And Mac users tend to have much higher expectations when it comes to UI/UX!
Since posting this, i've been learning the Cocoa / Objective-C way, and have been quite impressed. Despite what I initially thought was quite a quirky syntax, Objc appears to be a very effective language for implementing UI code, and the XCode sugar - things like Core Data and bindings - make short work of all of the boring bits.
I spent a while with the QT examples and documentation before digging into cocoa, and tend to agree with what has been said above w.r.t being slightly behind the curve and less 'aqua-ish' - albeit from a fairly trivial inspection. If I absolutely had to be build a cross-platform app i'd probably use QT rather than trying to separate out the UI code, as it seems like it would provide close-enough visuals, but for mac only purposes, Cocoa seems like a definite win.
Thanks all for your responses, they've all been very helpful!
DO NOT use Qt for a Mac app. You will get no hardware acceleration for 2D rendering, and you will not be able to deliver ADA compliance.
Depending on what kind of apps you want to write, another contender is REALbasic now called Xojo.
The move from C++ is pretty easy (I have 15 years C++ experience) and the framework and IDE extremely productive. You have the added bonus of being able to deploy to Linux and Windows with trivial effort. Their framework compiles to native code and uses native widgets so you don't have an emulated look and feel.
The big reason for learning Cocoa and coding in Objective-C is if you want to hone your iPhone skills or are chasing a really fancy user experience. If you wanted to rival the cutting edge of WPF development then I'd recommend Cocoa.