I have a project that is an open source application for a specific type of scientific calculation that uses c++ for the backend, and C# for the front end. I'm not doing anything windows specific in the c++ portion, so I'm hoping for a relatively small learning curve there. I have a few specific questions, and I would appreciate any advice in general about this type of transition. Please keep in mind that I know absolutely nothing about Linux, but I am willing to learn.
Is there an IDE that is similar to Visual Studio? Ideally, I would like to set it up in a similar fashion to what I have now, with 2 C# solutions and a couple of c++ dlls. I really don't want to use a text editor alone and link with a command line
Is there some tool to give me an idea about problems I might have in the transition?
Is there anyway to translate my Visual Studio options to gcc options?
I know that I don't need to support Linux technically, as almost everyone in my field uses Windows, or has easy access to a Windows box, but I thought this might be interesting from a technical standpoint.
There is a IDE you can use for C# on linux - it is Mono Develop. The current version will open visual studio project and solution files, so zero knowledge is needed to migrate to it.
It uses the Mono project, which is an implementation of C# for linux.
They have created a migration tool (MoMa) so you can test your C# code and see if it will work on linux - it will provide you with hints and explanations of what isn't portable and why.
I know this isn't the c++ route you are asking about, but it is probably going to be the easiest and quickest way to make your application platform independent.
The answer to nr 1 is: MonoDevelop. Which also comes with Mono, the .NET version that's platform independent. It's a must-use when you do this transition. It runs also on Windows, which makes the learning curve less steep.
The answer to nr 2 is: I don't know..., but running your program compiled for Mono should give you a fair idea of platform specific issues you have in your code.
The answer to nr 3 is: try that as a specific question, that will give that rather complex issue the right attention and support.
The answer to nr X is: use an automatic build (NAnt or similar) to automatically build your code for several target platforms. However, it is possible that your .NET code runs unmodified for either platform (ideally it should) and only your C++ part needs special attention.
Everyone else has already mentioned MonoDevelope. But there is also MoMA which can scan a .NET application and look for commands like pInvoke that will not be portable.
Related
Alrighty guys, I'm writing an application that I want to be cross-platform. Up until recently I've been trying to do this in Silverlight with C# because it also runs on OS X, but with me being fairly rusty with C# in addition to being new to Silverlight I've run into headache after headache. Most of this stems from the restrictions that come along with an application that's intended to run in a browser, issues with it running differently when running from my development sever vs directly from a file://, etc.
I'd rather completely abandon the whole OS X support idea than have to completely rewrite the app for OS X, especially since I have utterly NO experience writing for it. What I'm hoping to be able to do is write a regular app in C# .NET with Visual Studio for Windows and then easily port it to OS X with Mono.
How difficult is it to bring a .NET app over to OS X with Mono? My app is fairly straightforward, there's nothing exotic going on with the forms or anything, so I'd have to assume that it'd be supported in Mono's WinForms implementation.
Are there any good resources out there on how to port an app using Mono? Or, perhaps, am I missing the entire point and it simply lets you run .NET apps on OS X and I don't need to bother with porting?
Forgive my utter ignorance on the subject, I only started considering going this route like 10 minutes ago after running into yet another annoying restriction in Silverlight.
I'll be the first to admit that I don't know my head from my ass about this subject, so be gentle.. :)
Appart from MoMa as mentioned in the other answers you might be interested in MonoMac.
With the success of MonoTouch (writing c# for iPhone), there is now also a project called MonoMac to create native UI's for OSX while using .net/mono in the background. Might be interesting for you http://www.mono-project.com/MonoMac, article on Miguel de Icaza's blog: http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2010/Apr-19.html
In addition to what has been said already, considering that Mono supports a subset of the full .NET functionality, I would probably prefer to develop on Mono, then test against Microsoft's runtime, if the aim is to run on both of those. Otherwise, you run the risk of inadvertantly using some functionality that isn't available in Mono, and have to throw a large chunk of code out the window by the time you get around to doing the cross-platform build and testing.
Mono project has a page dedicated to how to port applications,
http://mono-project.com/Guidelines:Application_Portability
However, it is never enough as your application can be unique in so many ways.
Try to port it and report issues to Mono guys whenever necessary. Besides, if you work for a firm, consider Mono's commercial support service,
http://mono-project.com/Support
There are several things you should keep in mind.
you'll have to port any usage of platform depedendent UI code
don't use platform dependentent OS calls (win32 api)
don't use "exotic" libraries (like workflow, sadly ef)
In general: abstract dependencies to such code away, so you can easily replace them with mono-specific libraries. (an adviseable pattern would be MVVM).
There is a tool called MoMA that will help you with all that. However, take the results with a grain of salt. In any case, just try it.
I've been playing with Java for years as a means of developing quick and easy tools for repetitive tasks. I am not a true "developer" in the traditional sense, but I have lots of experience creating a wide assortment of tools and PoCs.
Unfortunately for me, I have noticed many shops are specifically looking for experience with C#, and not so many for Java. Even here on SO, there are more questions and more followers to C# related issues than Java. My preference will always be Java over C# simply for the cross-platform compatibility, but since the languages are so similar, I believe it would be beneficial for me to cross-train. I have already dabbled in other languages and scripts (VB and other BASIC flavors, Javascript, VBScript, ASP, JSP, PHP, etc.) so adding another isn't out of the question.
My current Java environment simply consists of a text editor (primarily jEdit for its plugins and layout) and homemade scripts to compile/jar my projects. I don't like to use IDEs because I want full control over my code and don't want a program writing code for me. (I also prefer to write my own code as opposed to using any sort of external library/package, if feasible. It helps me learn and greatly reduces unnecessary code.)
Therefore, what are my options for a non-IDE C# SDK? Libraries are obviously not that important to me. I've heard of Mono, which appears to separate the functions, but haven't tried it yet. What other SDKs exist that are similar to a simple Java SDK combined with a text editor?
Using an IDE doesn't have to mean anything writing code for you. I'm not generally keen on designer-generated code, but unless you decide to use a designer (or snippets etc), Visual Studio won't be writing code for you. Of course it will create a skeleton class for you when you create one, add the appropriate method signatures when you implement an interface etc - but is that boilerplate really something you want to write yourself?
I'd also suggest that your policy of not using external libraries is a bad one. I agree that it's useful for educational purposes to sometimes reimplement something, but it means that the code quality is likely to end up being worse... why would you not want to use code that has already been used and improved by many other people? Yes, you need to be careful about what libraries you use - but you really don't want to do everything yourself... not if you want to be productive, anyway.
I often use a text editor and command line myself for simple test code (e.g. for Stack Overflow questions) but I wouldn't dream of doing that for "real" code that I plan to keep.
Honestly, a lot of C# and .NET is about learning the tools; Visual Studio gives you a lot that you wouldn't be able to do with a text editor. There's a free version, and I highly suggest you check it out! People hiring will want to know that you're familiar with the tools they'll most likely be using.
You can just start with Notepad and csc.exe, the the command-line C# compiler that ships with the .NET SDK.
However, IDE is not necessarily synonym for code generator. I would download Visual Studio Express and start with empty Console projects.
Have fun!
Don't forget you can build/assemble C# projects using MSBuild and a .sln file if you really want. But the IDEs will make life a lot easier.
The IDE will not write code for you, it will help you writing code. Using libraries will help you concentrate on what you really want to program, not the things that already have been done.
Check into AvalonEdit, the text editor component of SharpDevelop. It is an open source text editor that has classes that could implement features such as intellisense and syntax highlighting. You would only have to use as much of it as you wanted and you could embed it anywhere you would use a text box control.
If you are familiar with Ant from Java then you could also check out NAnt to do your compile phase.
As far as I know, with Visual Studio you also get a command line C# compiler, csc. You could use a text editor and manually compile your C# code with that on the command line if you really want - that wouldn't be very practical however when your project contains more than a handful of source files.
If your project becomes bigger, you could use a tool like NAnt, which is a .NET version of the popular Java build tool Ant.
I agree with Jon Skeet about that your way of working is not very practical. If you are really looking for a software development job, you'd better learn to use the tools that other developers use. An employer will also not accept the fact that you'd want to write all the code yourself instead of using libraries. By using libraries instead of writing it all yourself you save lots of time, you are reusing well-tested code and your code will be much easier to maintain by other developers.
Is it worthwhile learning C# if you are a Linux user? There is Mono but it seems destined to always be behind the curve with the constant threat of MS action if they start to lose money.
Currently I am leaning more towards Java as its is fully GPLed and there are no major threats of software patents. It already has a big oss community behind it and has a solid reputation on the server whereas C# still needs to prove itself there.
The big advantage for C# programmers is that they are cheaper than Java developers. I also wonder exactly how portable C# code is though. Can one simply take a C# app written to target Mono and run it on windows?
I've written a number of C# command-line programs, specifically to run as distributed simulation engines, that were targeted for Ubuntu. They work perfectly there or on Windows.
It's hard to say what the future holds, but C# is a powerful language and I think it's worth learning even just for our personal growth. I despise Windows myself but have been writing C# for a while (for Windows mostly) since it pays the bills.
Novell uses Mono extensively for their Linux applications and I think that their relationship with Microsoft adds some weight to the idea that .NET for Linux will stick around.
Here's a list of some of the companies using Mono.
"on the server whereas C# still needs
to proof itself there"
You do know MySpace is built ontop of ASP.NET, right? Millions of hits a day running off a C# backend.
Sorry for the flame-bait, but I've personally had more portability success with mono, than java. Not a blanket statement, just my experience.
This question has already been asked and answered many times on SO.
Is Mono ready for prime time?
Why Use Mono?
Given your scenario, me personally I would learn Java, as you will find the transition into C# further down the line, quite smooth. Also having Java under your belt is a very good thing. I would say Java is much more portable than C# although you have the option of using the Compact Framework, which will be quicker to bootstrap with your program.
I work for a company that uses both Java and C#. I prefer C# because I think Visual Studio blows away Eclipse, and I just like the language better. However, I think you might do better learning Java in your case. You have more flexibility both for your project and career-wise. You can learn C# anytime.
C# is a nice language, and I find it much easier to work with than C/C++, especially for GTK applications.
I also think that learning C# would be a much better investment than learning Java. I'm saying this for no other reason than my personal taste, but I also honestly and objectively believe that C# will have a better future than Java.
As for running Mono apps on Windows, you can usually do this without a hassle, but if it's a GUI application, you will either have to create a Windows version that uses Winforms, or your users will have to install GTK for Windows. Either way, your applications will have a much better look and feel than Java applications on both platforms.
Finally, I don't think M$ will take legal action against Mono anytime soon.
It works very nice. IMHO you should use Mono from the development site (www.go-mono.com) rather than version provided with your distribution.
Also you could try dry-running it with VMWare machine that is also avaliable on the official site.
I've previously asked a question about an issue I have been experiencing with CSharpOptParse that didn't get much of a response. Since I haven't been able to resolve the issue, I'm looking around for an alternative library.
While the issue I'm experiencing isn't really enough of a compulsion for me to search for an alternative...the fact that the last development for this library was done in 2005 worries me a bit.
Does anyone know of any good equivalent C# command line option parsing library?
Mono distribute a library in the form of a single source file to simply place inline in your own projects called Mono.Options since 2.2 as the suggested replacement for Mono.GetOptions
This is basically NDesk.Options and it works just fine in MS.Net too.
CodePlex has a variety of libraries (of varying levels of development) active ones include:
ConsoleFX
commandline
CmdLine
CommandLineHelper
Writing fast native applications, with API calls and etc, in a modern cross platform programming language like C# would be awesome, wouldn't it? For example if you want to write a simple utility for helping IT people with installing things, which wouldn't need another components, in an easy and modern programming language? or if you want to write a 3D game, it should be fast, and JIT would just make it slower...
Why, why isn't it possible? Why there are no native modern programming languages for these things?
C# and .Net are native code. I think you misunderstand the JITter. It's not a VM. A C# program is compiled to fully native code before any of it is executed.
Now, the "needing other components" part is a concern. Give it time, though. You'll be hard pressed to find a windows installation these days without at least .Net 2.0, and even a couple mainstream linux distros include mono out of the box.
Don't assume the JIT makes things slower. The JIT can optimize for the exact computer running the application rather than a generic computer like a 386 or Pentium. It can even make better speed/memory trade-off decisions when generating code because it knows exactly what's available. And if JIT still makes things slower, you can NGEN them so that JITting is all done beforehand.
As proof of this, consider that Quake has been ported to the CLR a couple of times, and in my personal tests, the frames per second have been faster when Quake runs on the CLR about half the times I demo it.
Compiled .NET programs have been shown to run just as quickly as C. If you want it ultra-lean write it in assembly for your native processor.
You can use the Microsoft NGEN.EXE tool to create a native image of a .NET assembly.
See MSDN NGEN documentation. Microsoft already though about what you're getting at here.
Microsoft also makes ILMERGE.EXE tool to merge multiple assembly files into one. This might border on optimization and speed too.
As a side note, Mono has full ahead of time compiling, eliminating the runtime. (I think that's how they get away running on iPhone, which prohibits any JIT.)
So, does this mean that we could fully compile and link a C# program using (limited) .NET calls into a standalone EXE that would run without .NET being installed at all?
FYI: Checking a server estate of some 5000 servers revealed about 200 without even .NET 2.0.
This causes problems for code that must run on "all Windows instances". With .NET 4.0+ not including 2.0 this gets worse as both new AND old Windows machines might not have the 'right' .NET
there is, C. C can be used to write any application , ever !!!