Code::Blocks Forums

User forums => General (but related to Code::Blocks) => Topic started by: Roman on August 28, 2007, 09:40:14 pm

Title: Portability Question )
Post by: Roman on August 28, 2007, 09:40:14 pm
Hi there!

MinGW fans may kill me in no time but the question sticks in my head:

Coud C::B be compiled by MSVC (6,7,8)?
Did someone try?

Why I'm interesting:
MSVC shows several times better performance when doing with c++ streams. I suppose C::B uses them much (correct me if I'm wrong). So it is interesting to have a build with 'fast' IO )

Best Regards,
Roman
Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: stahta01 on August 28, 2007, 10:14:56 pm
Yes, someone has tried. I never heard of anyone who finished it. But, someone posted that he was close in the past year or two.

I tried once, gave up after two hours of trying.

Tim S

Very old mid 2005 thread
http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,335.30.html

Early 2006 threads
http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,2437.0.html
http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,2085.0.html

Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: thomas on August 29, 2007, 12:17:54 am
Code::Blocks uses no streams at all (at least not the streams you are thinking about). Building Code::Blocks with MSVC 6/7 is almost certainly impossible, since they don't support the necessary C++ language features.

MSVC 8 might work, I don't know... there is no urgent reason why it should not.
Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: Roman on August 29, 2007, 04:30:28 pm
Quote from: thomas on August 29, 2007, 12:17:54 am
they don't support the necessary C++ language features.

I know a bit of sad truth about VC6 ). What are C++ features missing in VC7 but used by C::B?

With regards,
Roman

Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: Tjaalie on August 29, 2007, 10:49:10 pm
Actualy I'm working on a version that works on MSVC becouse this is my first step into compiling a x64 version
wich I don't think I will ever compile.
Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: Tjaalie on August 30, 2007, 05:10:09 pm
I have a problem with the fact that the SDK uses -export-all-symbols, the ms compiler doesn't have a parameter like this
so I can build the codeblocks.dll but not all the needed stuff is exported, im working on a tool that will extract all this info
from a .obj and then add it to a .def file. So I got all build targets working till 'src' wich fails on linking becouse of the fact that
not everything is exported.
Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: JGM on August 30, 2007, 05:38:44 pm
Quote from: Tjaalie on August 30, 2007, 05:10:09 pm
I have a problem with the fact that the SDK uses -export-all-symbols, the ms compiler doesn't have a parameter like this
so I can build the codeblocks.dll but not all the needed stuff is exported, im working on a tool that will extract all this info
from a .obj and then add it to a .def file.

I don't know if this works PEEXPORT.EXE, it extract info that you can output to some .def file. You can find that tool on the Walk32 package. Here is a download location: http://www.programmersheaven.com/download/355/download.aspx
Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: Tjaalie on August 30, 2007, 06:48:49 pm
Does this suport .obj (COFF) files?
Becouse I can't test it becouse I have a 64bit system and it complains that
this is not a a 64 exe, while code blocks another 32 bit exe works fine.

But I found a very usefull document on MSDN,

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firmware/PECOFFdwn.mspx
Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: Tjaalie on August 30, 2007, 07:50:20 pm
Owke I managed to extract the symbol names from the .obj file.
But the contents seems a bit cryptic, the names are there but I fail to understand all the other stuff inside the name.
And of course when you declerate it as something else as the standard __thiscall (if I recall correct) it will be totaly different (correct?).
But if there is a realy smart guy floating around here that is willing to give me a hand at this stuff here is the output (so far).

Quote
Crc32.obj (from sdk/Crc32.cpp)
??_EwxString@@QAEPAXI@Z
??3@YAXPAX@Z
??_V@YAXPAX@Z
??_M@YGXPAXIHP6EX0@Z@Z
?FromFile@wxCrc32@@YAIABVwxString@@@Z
__unwindfunclet$?FromFile@wxCrc32@@YAIABVwxString@@@Z$1
__unwindfunclet$?FromFile@wxCrc32@@YAIABVwxString@@@Z$0
?cbReadFileContents@@YA?AVwxString@@AAVwxFile@@W4wxFontEncoding@@@Z
__ehhandler$?FromFile@wxCrc32@@YAIABVwxString@@@Z
___CxxFrameHandler3
@__security_check_cookie@4
?FromString@wxCrc32@@YAIABVwxString@@@Z
?GetCRC32Table@@YAPAIPAI@Z
??_U@YAPAXI@Z

In the mean time I will google my **s off.

So far I think the double '?' must be ignored and and the single '?' contain the usefull stuff, I'm going to write a simple extractor but I would like to know what the rubbish at the end of the name does?

EDIT:
No Problem(tm) I already found it out. You only want the ones with ? in front and read till a @ is it a double class name follows, else parameter trash follows. Its realy easy I'm gonne finish the tool now, if anyone is intrested I can post the source+binary, its a realy handy tool if you want to export all functions and classes from a vc++ dll but don't want to create a .def file by hand, all you need is all the .obj files.
Title: Re: Portability Question )
Post by: Tjaalie on August 30, 2007, 09:45:58 pm
The tool is ready, I will upload it here.
Its one big hacked togetter c and c++ mixture so don't expect to feel happy when you look at the code.

Usage '"OBJ2DEF [obj file] [def file] [0=overwrite 1=apend]"
The only thing you need to do after you used this app is add the following lines
infront of your generated .def file:
Code
LIBRARY [YourDllNameHere]
EXPORTS

[attachment deleted by admin]