Managed C++/CLI

FirstPrevNext

.NET via unmanaged C++ COM 13-May-02 11:02 13-May-02 11:02  I have the following method that instantiates a specified class in a given .NET assembley with specified activation attributes. HRESULT LoadCORClassEx( BSTR AssemblyName, /* mscorlib */ BSTR typeName, /* System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex */ REFIID riid, void **ppv, SAFEARRAY *args) { HRESULT hr = S_OK; if(ppv == NULL) return E_POINTER; *ppv = 0; /*** debug ***/ VARIANT var; HRESULT hresult; long ix = 0; VariantInit(&var); hresult = SafeArrayGetElement( args, &ix, &var); if(FAILED(hresult)) return hresult; /*** end debug ***/ CComPtr<_ObjectHandle> spHandle; spHandle.p = g_host.spDefaultAppDomain->CreateInstance_2( AssemblyName, typeName, args); CComVariant unwrapped; unwrapped = spHandle->Unwrap(); if (unwrapped.vt != VT_UNKNOWN && unwrapped.vt != VT_DISPATCH) return E_UNEXPECTED; return unwrapped.punkVal->QueryInterface(riid, ppv); } I can get the contents of the args SAFEARRAY that is passed into this method into a variant -- shown in the debugger as {"abc" VT_BSTR} -- before the subsequent call to CreateInstance_2(), however, when I step into the call to CreateInstance_2(), the underlying raw_CreateInstance_2() call in mscorlib.tli blows up . Can anyone see what I am doing wrong here? I tried adding the save /*** debug ***/ code to mscorlib.tli in order to peek at the content of the SAFEARRAY being passed for activation attributes, but the debugger seems to ignore the added code... Thanks for any insights! -- Roy Making DLLs zakimurtaza12-May-02 6:27 zakimurtaza 12-May-02 6:27  WEll! i may not be very clear about the question i am asking myself! but what i wanna ask is that what are the different ways to make the Dll's in .NET and are the DLL's in the .NET can be managed ones! Re: Making DLLs Nish Nishant13-May-02 4:45 Nish Nishant 13-May-02 4:45  If you have VS.NET, then simply use the wizard to create a Managed C++ Class Library and that's it. Just don't give a main or a wmain anywhere Nish Regards, Nish Native CPian. Born and brought up on CP. With the CP blood in him. wchar_t* to __gc String* Nish Nishant11-May-02 1:18 Nish Nishant 11-May-02 1:18  Is this safe? I have found that wchar_t* variables are implicitly cast to __gc String* variables. I hope this is okay and does not have any hidden issues. Nish Regards, Nish Native CPian. Born and brought up on CP. With the CP blood in him. Re: wchar_t* to __gc String* James T. Johnson11-May-02 1:56 James T. Johnson 11-May-02 1:56  Makes sense to me, managed String and char types are unicode safe. James Simplicity Rules! Re: wchar_t* to __gc String* Nish Nishant11-May-02 3:37 Nish Nishant 11-May-02 3:37  James T. Johnson wrote: Makes sense to me, managed String and char types are unicode safe. Whew! Nice to hear that Nish Regards, Nish Native CPian. Born and brought up on CP. With the CP blood in him. #pragma managed/unmanaged Nish Nishant11-May-02 1:15 Nish Nishant 11-May-02 1:15  I discovered that you cannot use #pragma unmanaged for a member function of a managed class, even though the member function uses only unmanaged calls. Thus I have concluded that you can use #pragma unmanaged only for unmanaged global functions or for unmanaged classes. But then, what's the bloody point, since unmanaged code will get compiled to native code anyway! Nish Regards, Nish Native CPian. Born and brought up on CP. With the CP blood in him. Re: #pragma managed/unmanaged James T. Johnson11-May-02 1:55 James T. Johnson 11-May-02 1:55  Thats the whole point, you can call the x86 code from managed code #pragma managed public __gc class MyClass { // other garbage void DoLotsOfUnmanagedThings() { unmanagedCall(); } }; #pragma unmanaged void unmanagedCall() { // 100% unmanaged code goes here } James Simplicity Rules! Re: #pragma managed/unmanaged Nish Nishant11-May-02 3:38 Nish Nishant 11-May-02 3:38  Well, when it sees a fuilly unmanaged function, why doesn't it auto-apply #pragma unmanaged to that block? Nish Regards, Nish Native CPian. Born and brought up on CP. With the CP blood in him. Re: #pragma managed/unmanaged James T. Johnson11-May-02 3:51 James T. Johnson 11-May-02 3:51  Don't know I tricked you by letting you think I actually learned something when in reality i've been too busy sleeping and working on the screensaver Oh and looking for good songs on mp3.com, here, here, and here. James Simplicity Rules! Re: #pragma managed/unmanaged Nish Nishant11-May-02 4:52 Nish Nishant 11-May-02 4:52  James T. Johnson wrote: Simplicity Rules! Try saying that to Chris Losinger Nish Regards, Nish Native CPian. Born and brought up on CP. With the CP blood in him. Re: #pragma managed/unmanaged James T. Johnson11-May-02 5:02 James T. Johnson 11-May-02 5:02  James Simplicity Rules! Re: #pragma managed/unmanaged Rama Krishna Vavilala11-May-02 4:29 Rama Krishna Vavilala 11-May-02 4:29  Nish [BusterBoy] wrote: Well, when it sees a fuilly unmanaged function, why doesn't it auto-apply #pragma unmanaged to that block? 1. Managed Code - Code that compiles into IL (atleast in the first version of CLR in the next version it would be possible to have IL unmanaged functions) 2. Unmanaged Code - Code that compiles into native processor's instructions So you see there is nothing called an unmanaged function before anything gets compiled. It is perfectly legal to have global functions in managed code. ILASM can create and use it( may be VB.NET). Re: #pragma managed/unmanaged Nish Nishant11-May-02 4:50 Nish Nishant 11-May-02 4:50  Rama Krishna wrote: So you see there is nothing called an unmanaged function before anything gets compiled. That's what I thought too, till it disallowed me from using the #pragma unmanaged directive to a function Nish Regards, Nish Native CPian. Born and brought up on CP. With the CP blood in him. VC++.Net Ollie8-May-02 23:16 Ollie 8-May-02 23:16  If i write a program in UNMANAGED VC++ 7.0 using ATL 7.0 and\or MFC 7.0, do I have to install the .Net framework or can I just supply the required ATL\MFC DLL's to the users machine? Is installing the framework just for Microsoft's CLR? Re: VC++.Net James T. Johnson8-May-02 23:35 James T. Johnson 8-May-02 23:35  If its unmanaged you don't need the framework; only when you cross into managed code do you need the framework on the users machine. James Simplicity Rules! Re: VC++.Net Ollie9-May-02 0:02 Ollie 9-May-02 0:02  So I guess if I am using 'normal' and Managed code I just have to install the framework? Re: VC++.Net James T. Johnson9-May-02 0:18 James T. Johnson 9-May-02 0:18  Yes. If your application uses both; the framework has to be installed. Something that just came to mind though. If you have it set so it can *optionally* load the managed code (ie it loads the managed code on demand and doesn't have anything about the managed code compiled aside from a GUID), then the framework could possibly be an option for the client as well... But if they decide to use it they will need the framework. James Simplicity Rules! Re: VC++.Net James T. Johnson9-May-02 0:20 James T. Johnson 9-May-02 0:20  BTW, hopefully this time next year or the year after we can assume that many will have the framework installed so the fact there is a 20MB download won't be as much of an issue. James Simplicity Rules! Re: VC++.Net Nish Nishant9-May-02 0:24 Nish Nishant 9-May-02 0:24  The redistributable is already part of windows update Nish The posting stats are now in PDF:- http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/ Feel free to make your comments. Updated - May 04th, Saturday Re: VC++.Net James T. Johnson9-May-02 0:30 James T. Johnson 9-May-02 0:30  End users, using windows update?!?!?! That'll be the day.... The problem with windows security problems isn't the problems its that stupid users don't patch their computers up to get rid of the problems. This is non-existant in the *nix community because almost everyone who uses it knows about security problems and patches them ASAP. James Simplicity Rules! Re: VC++.Net Nish Nishant8-May-02 23:35 Nish Nishant 8-May-02 23:35  Ollie wrote: If i write a program in UNMANAGED VC++ 7.0 using ATL 7.0 and\or MFC 7.0, do I have to install the .Net framework No, you dont have to. Ollie wrote: can I just supply the required ATL\MFC DLL's to the users machine? Yes, that's what you should do Nish The posting stats are now in PDF:- http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/ Feel free to make your comments. Updated - May 04th, Saturday Re: VC++.Net ColinDavies8-May-02 23:38 ColinDavies 8-May-02 23:38  Ollie the use of the word UNMANAGED implies deviant behavior, Many of us are calling it 'normal' programming now. Regardz Colin J Davies Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin More about me Re: VC++.Net Nish Nishant8-May-02 23:41 Nish Nishant 8-May-02 23:41  With the advent of .NET, normality got inversed Nish The posting stats are now in PDF:- http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/ Feel free to make your comments. Updated - May 04th, Saturday Newbie in trouble with MC++ Jaims7-May-02 22:05 Jaims 7-May-02 22:05  Hello, I've been working for a couple of years with VC++; a few months ago I started to see information about Managed C++ but actually I don't know nothing at all about it. I've been searching recently for some introductory articles or explanations but I've been not able to find it. Does anyone know where could I find something like that? In the board everybody seems to be already deeply inside the world of MC++, but I need something more basic!! Thanx in advance Jaims

Last Visit: 31-Dec-99 18:00     Last Update: 4-Oct-24 1:30 Refresh ᐊ Prev1...585586587588589590591592593594 Next ᐅ

General    News    Suggestion    Question    Bug    Answer    Joke    Praise    Rant    Admin   

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.