VC++ resources in a static library - visual-c++

Is it possible to build resources into a static library and reuse them by simply linking with the library?
I'm primarily thinking about the case where you call a function in the library which in turn accesses resources.

The only thing you need to do to use resources (images, dialogs, etc...) in a static library in Visual C++ (2008), is include the static library's associated .res file in your project. This can be done at "Project settings/Linker/Input/Additional dependencies".
With this solution, the resources of the static library are packed into the .exe, so you don't need an extra DLL. Regrettably, Visual Studio does not include the .res file automatically as it does for the .lib file (when using the "project dependencies"-feature), but I think this small extra step is acceptable.
I have looked for a very long time for this solution, and now it surprises me it is that simple. The only problem is that it is totally undocumented.

It can be done, but it's quite painful: You can't do it by simply linking with the static library.
Consider this: resources are embedded in an EXE or DLL. When some code in the static library calls (e.g.) LoadIcon, it'll get the resources from the EXE or DLL that it's linked with.
So, if your static library requires resources to be available, you've got a couple of options:
You can have the library build them on the fly, and then use (e.g.) CreateDialogIndirect. See Raymond Chen's "Building a dialog template at run-time".
You can have them embedded in the library as simple arrays (i.e.) char my_dialog_resource[] = { .... };, and then use (e.g.) CreateDialogIndirect. You'll probably need to find (or write) a utility that converts from .RES files to .CPP files.
You can ship the LIB file with a resource script (.RC file) and corresponding header file. You then #include them as relevant. You'll need to reserve a range of resource IDs for the LIB to use, so that they don't collide with those of the main EXE or DLL. This is what MFC does when used as a static library. Or you can use string resource IDs (this doesn't work for STRINGTABLE resources).
Your static library can ship with a separate resource DLL.

I just went through this with the MS Visual Studio compiler. We were converting some legacy projects from DLLs into static libraries. Several of these DLLs had dialog or string resources embedded in them. I was able to compile the .RC scripts for these DLLs into our main application by including them in the main application's RC script file via the "TEXTINCLUDE" mechanism. I found it easiest to do this by editing the RC file directly, but Visual Studio provides a slightly more "wizardy" mechanism as well. The implementation is most likely different in other compilers.
To manipulate the main RC script directly:
.1. In the "2 TEXTINCLUDE" section, include the header file that defines the resource IDs for your library. The syntax is
2 TEXTINCLUDE
BEGIN
"#include ""my_first_lib_header.h""\r\n"
"#include ""my_second_lib_header.h""\0"
END
.2. In the "3 TEXTINCLUDE" section, include the RC script from your library.
3 TEXTINCLUDE
BEGIN
"#include ""my_first_library.rc""\r\n"
"#include ""my_second_library.rc""\0"
END
Steps 3 and 4 should happen automatically, but I found it was more reliable to just enter them myself, rather than depending on Microsoft's resource script compiler to take care of things.
.3. Add the header file with your libraries resource defines to the read only symbols list. This list is usually near the top of the file.
#define APSTUDIO_READONLY_SYMBOLS
#include "my_first_lib_header.h"
#include "my_second_lib_header.h"
#undef APSTUDIO_READONLY_SYMBOLS
.4. Include your library's RC script in the APSTUDIO_INVOKED section. This is usually at the bottom of the file.
#ifndef APSTUDIO_INVOKED
#include "my_first_library.rc"
#include "my_second_library.rc"
#endif
You can also do all of this automatically through the visual studio IDE, but I found it didn't always apply when I expected it to.
Open the "Resource View" window in Visual Studio.
Right-click on your main application's resource file and choose "Resource Includes..." from the context menu.
In the box labeled "Read-only symbol directives," add the include statements for the .h files that define the resource ID's for your libraries.
In the box labeled "Compile-time directives," add the include statements for your library's .rc script.
Click okay. You may also want to manually trigger the RC script compilation, to make sure it happens.
If your library's resource script references any files on disk (text files, icons files, etc.), you'll need to make sure that the main application project knows where to find them. You can either copy these files to somewhere your application can find them or you can add an additional include path in the compiler settings.
To add an additional include path:
Open up the properties dialog for your main application.
Select "Configuration Properties/Resources/General" from the left-hand navigation pane.
In the properties list, Enter any pertinent paths next to "Additional Include Directories."

As per Visual Studio 2010, the development tools from Microsoft apparently cannot properly handle compiled resource data inside static libraries at all.
To distribute a compiled resource file (a .res file), you have two choices:
Distribute the .res files separately, and instruct the client code to link against them;
Use cvtres to merge several .res files into a single object (.obj) file, and provide it separately.
Note that you can't lib in object files created with cvtres. If multiple object files are provided, lib complains as though as multiple .res files were given; if a single object file is provided, lib does not complain, but the linker simply ignores the embedded resource data in the lib file.
It might be the case that there is a way to force the linker to read and link the libbed in resource data (with some command-line option, section manipulation and so on), since the resource data is indeed available in the library (as dumpbin reveals). So far, I haven't found a solution, and, unless one is willing to hack the development tools, anything better than this simple solution is probably not worth the effort.
The only way to ship resource data in a static library (in this case, with a static library) is to distribute the resources separately and explicitly link them in the client code. Using cvtres can reduce the number of distributed resource files to one, if you have many of them.

I don't think so. Static library doesn't have it's own HINSTANCE. It's code is executed in the context of DLL or EXE which links it. That's why all the resources you'll try to load from the static library's code will be of that enclosing DLL/EXE.
I did that kind of resources reuse with a DLL though, as far as it has it's own address space, and you can call LoadResource with DLL's HINSTANCE.

The recommended way is to provide a dll with the resources together with your library.

When the following method is used, any resource (in this example, an icon) can be used as an integral part of a static library and such library can be used by any type of application, including a console one (which doesn't have any resource segment whatsoever).
Icon is converted to a static array of BYTE. bin2c can be used for that.
Data is converted into a HICON handle. Here is how I have done that:
HICON GetIcon()
{
DWORD dwTmp;
int offset;
HANDLE hFile;
HICON hIcon = NULL;
offset = LookupIconIdFromDirectoryEx(s_byIconData, TRUE, 0, 0, LR_DEFAULTCOLOR);
if (offset != 0)
{
hIcon = CreateIconFromResourceEx(s_byIconData + offset, 0, TRUE, 0x00030000, 0, 0, LR_DEFAULTCOLOR | LR_DEFAULTSIZE);
}
return hIcon;
}
GetIcon is used instead of LoadIcon.
Instead of calling:
m_hIcon = ::LoadIcon(hInstanceIcon, MAKEINTRESOURCE(pXMB->nIcon));
Then call
m_hIcon = GetIcon()

Related

c++ analog of c# "project reference"

My solution contains several c# projects.
It's easy to add "refernce" from one project to another(References-Add Reference-Project). After that I can use classes from referenced project.
How can I do the same for native c++ projects? What kind of projects should I create? Console application/DLL/Static library?
There are two things in C / C++ :
Headers file, that will tell your program what they can use (e.g. class, function prototype declaration)
Implementation, either as a
source code that you recompile with your program
static lib (.lib on windows)
dynamic lib (.dll on windows)
You need both to compile your program with parts from another project.
If you only need a class from a big library and you have the source of this library it may be easier to reference the file corresponding to this class (and its dependencies of course). But if you need more, you should add the other project's directory to the include path of your current project in VCC, and link against the library (either static or dynamic, according to your needs).

Avoid adding "include paths" for headers that are not directly #included

Suppose I have two vc++ project, proj_a and proj_b
proj_a contains a header file a.h
proj_b has dependency on proj_a. It contains file b.h that does #include <a.h>. I add a.h's directory in the "additional include directories" in its project settings to build it.
Now say, I have 100 more projects, whose files #include <b.h>. Only adding b.h's directory in the "additional" column does not work. I have to include the path of a.h too.. How to avoid this?
Simply put, how to keep the number of include paths for any vc++ project equal to the number of direct dependencies?
I don't have the option to set vc++ environment settings to globally include a.h's path since everybody else in my team will have to import my settings and things will turn messier..
I don't have enough idea but is there a way to achieve this through precompiled headers? I think they are project-specific and should not be shared across projects?
Dependencies are transitive. That is, since b.h includes a.h, anything that includes b.h will need to be able to find a.h. The only thing you can do about it is to somehow remove the dependency of b.h on a.h, perhaps by using a forward declaration for the types in a.h instead of relying on the full definition of the types from the header file.
If that's not an option, at least you can ease the pain of include paths that are duplicated across projects by using Visual C++'s "property sheet" feature. These let you define shared build settings in a single file which can be inherited by an arbitrary number of projects. This will also solve the problem of sharing these settings with your collaborators.
Thanks for the answer Nick. I could have used relative path to a.h inside b.h and save having additional-include-directories inside proj_b and rest of 100 projects.
Actually, in my case there are multiple flavors of proj_a: 'proj_a1, proj_a2, etc. each having a separate a.h. The other 100 projects decide on which flavor to include by having appropriate additional-include-directory in their settings. This was an issue, whenever we need to upgrade proj_a flavors, all include-dirs will need to be changed.
I got across this problem by removing all include-dirs and instead defining PROJ_A1, PROJ_A2, etc. in the rest of projects. b.h does not #include a.h anymore, it include a a_redirector.h header file instead (with relative path). Inside a_redirector.h, we have all #ifdef PROJ_A1, #ifdef PROJ_A2, etc. that looks at the include a particular a.h file (relative paths here too) depending on what has been defined.
Now, whenever we need to upgrade proj_a flavors, I need only to modify a_redirector.h only to point to all new a.h thereby having a single point of control as compared to the earlier architecture.

.h, .dll and .lib confusion

I'm new to vc++. I've just built a software and it generated a .dll and a .lib. I need to use functions from this in my code. Do I need to link to both .lib and .dll to build my code? What project properties do I have to alter to do this linking?
Actually, you need only the .dll file. It contains all the necessary code and data to run it's functions. It also contains a table that links the symbolic names of the functions (e.g. the function PrintMe), their ordinals (the number of that function in the DLL) and their addresses in the DLL.
If you want to use only the DLL, you have to "manually" get the symbols resolved:
Let's say you want to use the function PrintMe of the DLL. What you had to do is to resolve it's name (PrintMe) or it's ordinal (PrintMe is the 1st function of the DLL) to it's address. For this, you could use LoadLibrary, GetModuleHandle and GetProcAdress from the Win32 API (aka Windows SDK). Additionally, this method allows you to load the DLL at runtime (see below).
The easier way is to use the MSVC(++) features __declspec(dllexport) and __declspec(dllimport), e.g.
// your DLL
__declspec(dllexport) void PrintMe()
{
printf("Hello World!");
}
// you project to use the DLL
__declspec(dllimport) void PrintMe();
The first one (dllexport) tells the compiler to export the function. The second one (dllimport) is the interesting one: It creates all the necessary code to be able to use the function from the DLL.
For this, you need the .lib file in your project (which wants to use the DLL). The .lib file contains information for the linker to resolve the symbol name (PrintMe) to its address in the DLL. Since the .lib is statically bound, the linker can make use of it - the DLL on the contrary is bound at runtime / loading time, so the linker cannot use it. (Yes, the information in the .lib file is redundant.). Note: You cannot change the whole DLL when using this method w/o rebuilding your project with the new .lib file. Some structure changes affect the addresses of the functions in the DLL, see this SO answer.
One last difference between using the Win32 API (LoadLibrary...) and the MSVC method via __declspec is the loading of the DLL. When you use LoadLibrary, the DLL is loaded at runtime, of course (so you can catch exceptions when it cannot be found and so on). The other method loads the DLL at loading time, so you program will terminate (will not run) when Windows cannot find the DLL.
When you create a project in VS, you can activate the "export symbols" checkbox at the end of a wizard (Win32 project). That gives you some examples of exported symbols. Additionally, it introduces a macro plus a preprocessor defition plus some directives that are very useful:
// DLL header
#ifdef _YOUR_DLL_EXPORTS
#define YOUR_DLL_API __declspec(dllexport)
#else
#define YOUR_DLL_API __declspec(dllimport)
#endif
YOUR_DLL_API PrintMe();
You now can use this header file to build you DLL as your DLL project has that _YOUR_DLL_EXPORTS definition (see project properties page, C++, preprocessor). The project that uses the DLL can use this header, too, but then must not have such a name defined. When you include the header file in the project in which you want to use the DLL, the macro is resolved to __declspec(dllimport). This instructs the linker to look for this function (which is found in the .lib file) and create all the necessary code to load the DLL at runtime and resolve the symbol name.

Why are there so many libraries in MSVC and why do I have to recompile the code again

In every platform there are various versions of a given library: multi-threaded, debug, dynamic, etc..
Correct me if I am wrong here, but in Linux an object can link to any version of a library just fine, regardless of how its compiled. For example, there is no need to use any special flags at compile time to specify whether the link will eventually be to a dynamic or a static version of the run-time libraries (clarification: I am not talking about creating dynamic/static libraries, I am talking about linking to them - so -fPIC doesn't apply). Same goes for debug or optimized version of libraries.
Why in MSVC (Windows in general with other compilers. true?) I need to recompile the code every time in order to link to different versions of libraries? I am talking the /MD, /MT, /MTd, /MDd, etc flags. Is the code actually using different system headers each time. If so, why?
I would really appreciate any pointers to solid documentation that discusses these library matters in Windows for a C/C++ programmer..
thanks!
The compiler setting does very little other than simple change some macro definitions. Its microsoft's c-runtime header files that change their behaviour based on the runtime selected.
First, the header files use a # pragma directive to embed in the object file a directive specifying which .lib file to include, choosing one of: msvcrt.lib, msvcrtd.lib, libcmt.lib and mibcmtd.lib
The directives look like this
#ifdef <release dll runtime>
#pragma comment(lib,"msvcrt.lib")
#endif
Next, it also modifies a macro definition used on all c-rt functions that adds the __declspec(dllimport) directive if a dll runtime was selected. the effect of this directive is to change the imported symbol from, say, '_strcmp' to '__imp__strcmp'.
The dll import libraries (msvcrt.lib and msvcrtd.lib) export their symbols (to the linker) as __imp_<function name>, which means that, in the Visual C++ world, once you have compiled code to link against the dll runtimes you cannot change your mind - they will NOT link against a static runtime.
Of course, the reverse is not the case - dll import libraries actually export their public symbols both ways: with and without the __imp_ prefix.
Which means that code built against a static runtime CAN be later co-erced into linking with the dll or static runtimes.
If you are building a static library for other consumers, you should ensure that your compiler settings include:
One of the static library settings, so that consumers of your .lib can choose themselves which c-runtime to use, and
Set the 'Omit Default Library Name' (/Zl)flag. This tells the compiler to ignore the #pragma comment(lib,... directives, so the obj files and resulting lib does NOT have any kind of implicit runtime dependency. If you don't do this, users of your lib who choose a different runtime setting will see confusing messages about duplicate symbols in libc.lib and msvcrt.lib which they will have to bypass by using the ignore default libraries flag.
These using these compiler options have two effects. The automatically #define a macro that may be used by header files (and your own code) to do different things. This effects only a small part of the C runtime, and you can check the headers to see if it's happening in your case.
The other thing is that the C++ compiler embeds a comment in your object file that tells the linker to automatically include a particular flavor of the MSVC runtime, whether you specify that library at link time or not.
This is convenient for small programs, where you simply type at a command prompt cl myprogram.cpp to compile and link, producing myprogram.exe.
You can defeat automatic linking of the commented-in flavor of the c-runtime by passing /nodefaultlib to the linker. And then specify a different flavor of the c-runtime instead. This will work if you are careful not to depend on the #defines for _MT and
_DLL (keep in mind that the standard C headers might be looking at these also).
I don't recommend this, but if you have a reason to need to do this, it can be made to work in most cases.
If you want to know what parts of the C header files behave differently, you should just search for _MT and _DLL in the headers and see.
All of the options use the same header files, however they all imply different #define which affect the header files. So they need to be recompiled.
The switches also link to the appropriate library, but the recompile is not because of the linking.
See here for a list of what is defined when you use each.

Platform independent resource management [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Is there a Linux equivalent of Windows' "resource files"?
(2 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
I'm looking for a way to embed text files in my binaries (like windows resource system). I need something thats also platform independent (works in windows and linux). I found Qt resource management to be what I need but I'm not keen on my app depending on Qt for this alone. I also found this tool at http://www.taniwha.com/~paul/res/ .. but it is too platform specific.
The xxd utility can be used to create a C source file, containing your binary blobs as an array (with the -i command line option). You can compile that to an object which is linked into your executable.
xxd should be portable to most platforms.
If you're using QT 4.5, you can make sure that program is only dependent on one small piece of QT, such as libqtcore. QResource is a part of libqtcore.
You can simlpy append all kinds of data to your normal binary. Works in both Windows and Linux. You'll have to open your own binary at runtime and read the data from there.
However, I have to agree that embedding data in binaries is a strange idea. It's common practice to include such data as separate files packaged with the application.
That is not such a great idea. On Linux, for example, data is expected to be installed in a subdirectory of "$datadir" which is, by default, defined to be "$prefix/share", where "$prefix" is the installation prefix. On Mac OS X, resources are expected to be installed in $appbundle/Contents/Resources, where $appbundle is the name of the folder ending in ".app". On Windows, installing data in a folder that is a sibling of the executable is not an uncommon practice. You may be better off using the CMake build system, and using its CPack packaging features for installing/bundling in the default, preferred platform-specific manner.
Although bundling your resources into the executable, itself, may seem cool, it is actually a dangerous idea... for example, will the embedded data be allocated in an executable page? What will happen if you attempt to overwrite or modify the data? What if you want to tweak or modify the data at runtime? Things to think about.
This looks very promising: https://github.com/cyrilcode/embed-resource
CMake based and platform-independent.
As I also do not like the idea of converting files into C arrays only to have them converted back to binaries, I created my own resource compiler using LLVM and Clang:
https://github.com/nohajc/resman
I tested it on Windows, Linux and macOS but it can potentially be run on any platform supported by LLVM.
It is used like this:
Create header file, e.g. res_list.h
#pragma once
#include "resman.h"
// Define a global variable for each file
// It will be used to refer to the resource
constexpr resman::Resource<1> gRes1("resource_file1.jpg"); // resource with ID 1
constexpr resman::Resource<2> gRes2("resource_file2.txt"); // resource with ID 2
constexpr resman::Resource<3> gRes3("resource_file3.mp3"); // resource with ID 3
...
Run resource compiler
$ rescomp res_list.h -o res_bundle.o
Link res_bundle.o to your project
Use the resource files
#include "res_list.h"
...
resman::ResourceHandle handle{gRes1};
// ResourceHandle provides convenient interface to do things like:
// iterate over bytes
for (char c : handle) { ... }
// convert bytes to string
std::string str{handle.begin(), handle.end()};
// query size and id
unsigned size = handle.size();
unsigned id = handle.id();
The resource compiler parses res_list.h (using Clang) but instead of generating cpp files, it goes straight to the native object file (or static library) format (using LLVM).

Resources