Is there any way to include Dapper in metro apps?
It relies on System.Data which is left out in WinRT.
If not is there any similar framework which can be used?
Is there any way to include Dapper in metro apps?
No. As you observe, the lack of System.Data is pretty much a show-stopper, however in addition WinRT also omits meta-programming support, so the entire core would need to be re-written to use regular (i.e. slow) reflection. There are some elaborate hoops you can jump through to get around this, but without System.Data it seems a lost cause.
Basically, the intent with WinRT (as I understand it) is to consume your data from things like web-services, the classic "smart client" rather than "rich client" model.
So you might consider:
server (full .NET)
using "dapper" for data-access
exposing some call/serialization protocol
client (.NET for Windows Store apps, or whatever the term is today)
consuming some call/serialization protocol
Strictly speaking, you can IIRC break all the rules and just reference .NET anyway, but that won't pass any MS validation, and won't be a proper metro Windows Store application.
Related
I am trying to evaluate some technologies for implementing a communication process between some Ada modules with some C++/OpenGL modules. There is an (Windows XP) Ada application which communicates with a C++ application using COM, but I intend to switch the COM to a new technology. Some suggestions came up, such as direct Sockets, DSA, Polyorb, Corba and DSS/Opensplice.
DSA appears to be just Ada -implemented (not sure)
Polyorb has its last implementation on 2006, according to http://polyorb.ow2.org/
Corba someone argumented that it could be not simple enough to justify its complexity for implementing simple applications
DSS/Opensplice appears to be just C/C++ implemented, so an Ada binding should be done. It also looks to be not very simple to be implemented too.
Personally I like COM, but due to the migration, I'd rather take the sockets option due to its simplicity, and the interface architecture could be implemented very easily.
So, what you think? Could you please comment about these technologies or even suggest other more?
Thanks very much.
A big factor in your choice is the size and complexity of the system you're reengineering. Is it a broadly distributed system with lots of complex messages? Is it a relatively small system with a handful of mundane message exchanges?
For small systems I used to just roll-my-own socket-based comm modules. Now, though, I lean more towards ZeroMQ (brokerless) or STOMP (text-based). And there's some Ada support for these, zeromq-Ada and TOMI_4_Ada (supports both).
While these handle the distribution mechanics, you would still need to handle the serialization of the messages into transportable form.
CORBA/PolyORB and DDS solutions are rather heavyweight, but are complete solutions. If you don't fear IDL and managing brokers, they can do well for large-scale distributed systems. Yeah, there may need to be some Ada bindings built, but if you can get C headers or a C API to bind to, it's typically not too bad if you focus on just binding the functions and data structures you require. Rather than creating a comprehensive binding, liberally employ opaque and void pointers (void_ptr, opaque_structure_def_ptr) for structs and parameters whose internal contents you don't care about.
we intend to switch the COM to a new (suported) technology, since COM is not more supported by Microsoft
Whoever told you COM is no longer supported is totally clueless.
While COM has undergone many name changes (OLE, COM, OLE Automation, DCOM, COM+, ActiveX, WinRT) and extensions over the past decades, it is the single most important technology for MS platforms: past, present and future. The .NET runtime uses COM extensively. Much of the Win32 API is written in COM, and the portions that weren't, will be in Win8, since WinRT components are COM objects.
Also take a look at AMQP (RabbitMQ for server), there seems to be Ada library available for it http://www.gti-ia.upv.es/sma/tools/AdaBinding/index.php.
If you could find binding for Ada, Apache thrift might also be a lightweight option. Maybe you could even write your own binding, it should not be more difficult that rolling something of your own over the sockets.
If you do go sockets route, than I would suggest ZeroMQ as "supersockets".
One more option for your list should be to use Ada's distributed programming support, and write C/C++ wrappers to interface your C++ program into it.
I don't know that its the best option for your needs, but if your Ada compiler supports Annex E, it should be on the list.
Since this post, AdaCore published PolyORB on GitHub with regular updates :)
This question already has answers here:
Closed 12 years ago.
Possible Duplicates:
What is a framework? What does it do? Why do we need a framework
What is the difference between a class library and a framework
Although I referred to various sources, I still can't understand the proper definition. What is meant by "application framework"?
Here's a simpler answer:
Application frameworks make writing applications easier.
Creating applications is hard. Applications have to provide input and output which they get through operating system semantics. Modern applications are usually GUI based and a GUI app is orders of magnitude more complex than a non-GUI app.
It's that simple. The framework takes all the complexities of interfacing with the operating system and simplifies them for you. It handles all the nitty-gritty details for you. Obviously certain frameworks do a better job at it than others.
There is one drawback to using an application framework that rarely seems to be discussed (presumably because we are all smiling about the amount of work we didn't have to do). In order to provide a simplified view of the operating environment, a framework has to box you into a certain 'style'. If your app is sufficiently different from the usual form of app, you are likely to end up frustrated in the framework as it will make doing what you want very difficult. This is partly because you now have to do all the things that the framework was hiding from you and partly because the framework is probably a closed system.
Frameworks are a special case of software libraries in that they are
reusable abstractions of code wrapped
in a well-defined Application
programming interface (API), yet they
contain some key distinguishing
features that separate them from
normal libraries.
An application framework consists of a framework used by software developers to implement the standard structure of an application for a specific development environment
Wikipedia answers, as you might expect, that an application framework is a framework for developing applications.
An application typically provides a user interface. "Application framework" can be used loosely to refer to user-interface frameworks that provide little more than a collection of low-level user-interface controls -- like MFC, Swing, Qt and the like.
However, it is useful to distinguish these from more powerful frameworks like the Eclipse Rich-Client Platform and the Netbeans Platform, which provide a higher-level framework -- built atop those low-level toolkits -- on which to develop applications.
I personally use "application platform" only for these latter platforms, and refer to the low-level APIs as "user-interface toolkits."
Is there a distributed application framework (commercial is okay as well) that supports iPhone / iPad ?
What I'm looking for in the framework:
Allows me to focus on the application logic
I don't have to code "low-level" network programming (I've done it too many times that I dont wanna do it again =p)
Should be actively maintained (popular would be nice)
Basically, I can then develop faster.
We plan to develop a soft real-time TCP/IP client/server application where there are many iPhone/iPad clients (30+) connected to single server over LAN. The server most likely will run Windows (unless the framework does not support it).
I've been looking around and I see:
MonoTouch WCF (still looks quite raw ?)
RemObjects (Mono + Objective-C)
Cocoa Distributed Objects
ZeroC Ice Touch (Objective-C)
RakNet ( ? included because it mentions iPhone, but will need to use C++)
Of course, there's also the option of using the plain old MonoTouch System.Net.Sockets
Or, CFNetwork (I dont plan to use this one)
I'm still deciding whether to use Objective-C or MonoTouch, but leaning towards MonoTouch since we will get the .NET framework, and not be tied into just the Mac world.
Please feel free to comment if I added anything that's not related to my question---I'm new to iPhone/iPad world.
We've used WCF/Monotouch with great success - there are some areas of the f/work that arent 100% but for most cases you should find working with WCF on monotouch a breeze.
The ability to share all of our data sync, model, tests etc between monodroid and monotouch and wm7 is seriously cool (with some working - this is easilly possible - you'll need to manage multiple prj files).
Be careful to manage calls to wcf services correctly, keep them to a minimum, keep the archetecture simple. We ended up with a fairly complex dto to minimise the amount of calls to the wcf services to sync the data - this was well worth it as the time needed to sync a device from scratch is now a fraction of what it was.
Using SSL to communicate with the server is a PITA but I think that's more a case of the way apple have managed it.
You need to be a bit more explicit on your requirements. If you need only object serialization (dehydration/hydration) over REST API, then anything that supports POX or JSON will work just fine for you. However, if you need RPC-style method invocation, with authentication, encryption/digital signature, transactions, etc, then you need one of those frameworks you listed above.
If you need a framework, I personally would lean towards the MonoTouch WCF, as it gives you the ability to move your client to other platforms later as well (Windows Phone 7 for example). Then again, as you said, it's a bit rough right now, and if Mono team decides in the future that they don't have the resources to invest in maintaining it, you might end up with having to move to another framework. Of course, there's also the drawback that you need to use MonoTouch for your application, and can't use Objective-C. Granted, with the recent changes in the iOS Developer Agreement, that's not that much of an issue, but it is still something to keep in mind.
(Disclaimer: I used to work on Microsoft's WCF team, so I am biased towards the product itself)
The other option I would go for, would be Cocoa Distributed Objects. However, that would be my choice if the server is also running on OS X. I know there's Bonjour for Windows, but I doubt it's optimized for server scenarios, and I also don't know how rich is Apple's RPC implementation on top of it for the Windows platform. So I would stay with Apple's technology only if I am building exclusively for Apple's platform.
Note that WCF and Distributed Objects would give you RPC-style functionality, but they won't help you with any particular scenarios. If you need/want even higher level of abstraction, for example you need presence information or multi-user chat, you will still need to implement those yourself. It might be worth at this point to look at frameworks that provide those features for you. An example would be RakNet (which you listed above), which abstracts the remoting level and builds additional features on top of it.
You can use JSON Touch + Vitche PHP Emission Framework which provides all server-side you need. Also you can use that Framework to access existing SOAP (WCF, Axis, etc) services.
You can use Google protocol buffers to implement RPC though you will need to do some network programming for transporting your messages anyway. It supports interface generation for C++, Java, Python and Objective-C and .NET so you can create a single set of RPC messages and get code for working with them for almost any mobile platform. Transport layer on your mobile platforms you will have to implement yourself.
http:// code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/ - main Protobuf page (C++, Java, Python)
http:// code.google.com/p/protobuf-net/ - Protobuf .NET mentioned in one of the comments
http:// code.google.com/p/metasyntactic/wiki/ProtocolBuffers - Protobuf for Obj-C
What are the advantages of using Framework over Library or other way around while developing Web Applications or different types of Software.
I understand using Framework we can make use of basic functionality and then add upon functionality which we require but I am having hard time understanding the advantages of it as if we develop using Library than also we get some basic functionality and then add upon them the functionality as we need and so where in comes the actual advantages of using Framework.
I think it's important to distinguish between a framework and a library when answering.
A framework follows the Hollywood principle: "Don't call us; we'll call you." You plug your code into the framework according to its API. The framework acts as a constraint that solves the particular problem it was designed to solve (e.g., web application development).
A framework will use a combination of your code and 3rd party libraries to solve a particular problem. It will treat your code as one of those 3rd party libraries.
If you eschew a framework, the roles are reversed. Now you and your code are in charge: "I'll do the calling, thank you." A library is a self-contained piece that plugs into the software that you write.
So why prefer a framework? Use one that is written better than the scaffolding that you would be able to write yourself. A framework is likely to be tested more thoroughly and have a wider user base than code you'll write.
You'd write an application without a framework if you're working on a specialized problem, you have deep knowledge of the domain, and there are no frameworks available that demonstrate deeper insight than you have.
A library is just something that solves a problem but it is your job to integrate it the project. Basically it offers some feature that are context-free.
A framework will provide the features plus an infrastructure for them - you will have to develop according to the framework's rules. So you might have less control and freedom but you save time.
So, there are several languages which will allow you to create a website, as long as you configure the server(s) well enough.
To my knowledge, there is:
PHP
ASP.NET
Ruby(on rails, what is
that all about?)
And thusly, my knowledge is limited. Ruby and ASP, I've only heard of, never worked with. If there are other languages, I suppose they have some way to make files containing the needed html. It would then suffice to add a line to the Apache config to associate the file-extension.
And if other languages: are there any notable characteristics about the one(s) you mention?
ANY language can be use to make a dynamic website - you could do it in COBOL or FORTRAN if you were twisted enough. Back in the olden days (about 10 years ago) most dynamic websites were done with CGI scripts - all you needed was a program that could read data from standard input and write data (usually HTML) to standard output.
Most modern languages have libraries and frameworks to make it easier. As well as the languages you have already mentioned, Java, C# and Python are probably the most common in use today.
Typically a web framework will have:
a way of mapping URLs to a class or function to handle the request
a mechanism for extracting data from a request and converting it into an easy to use form
a template system to easily create HTML by filling in the blanks
an easy way to access a database, such as an ORM
mechanisms to handle caching, redirections, errors etc
You can find a comparison of popular web frameworks on wikipedia.
How can you forget Java ? :)
Python
It runs on Windows, Linux/Unix, Mac OS X, and has been ported to the Java and .NET virtual machines.
Python is a perfect scripting language for web applications, e.g. via mod_python for the Apache web server. With Web Server Gateway Interface a standard API has been developed to facilitate these applications. Web application frameworks or application servers like Django, Pylons, TurboGears, web2py and Zope support developers in the design and maintenance of complex applications. Around libraries like NumPy, Scipy and Matplotlib, Python is a standard in scientific computing.
Among the users of Python are YouTube and the original BitTorrent client. Large organizations that make use of Python include Google, Yahoo!, CERN, NASA,and ITA.
This could be for your interest.
Virtually thru CGI all programming languages that produce output may use for web page generation.
Basically, you can use any language (if you are hosting your own server)
Very closely related and very interesting is this article where LISP has been used to build a very succesfull website.
Python has a 3rd party module CherryPy which can be used with or without a http server.
Amongst others: Erlang (YAWS, Mochiweb), Python
JSP has the advantage that it automatically wraps your code in a servlet, compiles that to bytecodes, then uses the just-in-time Java compiler to recompile critical sections into native object code. Not aware of any alternative which allows optimizes your work automatically in this way.
Also allows you to develop and deploy on any combination of Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux.
If you'd like to choose one for the beginning, you should check out PHP first. It gives you the basic clues about how dynamic sites work in general.
After you've become familiar with the basics, I recommend ASP.NET.
Fist off, you should know that ASP.NET is a technology and not a language. (It actually supports any language that can be used on the .NET platform.) Also it is not to be confused with classic ASP. (The old ASP was much more like PHP.)
ASP.NET is very easy to begin with, and after you have some clues about its concepts, you can always dig deeper and customize everything in it. The http://asp.net site is a very good starting point, if you are to learn it. I think it is really worth the effort, because even if you choose not to stick to it, it will give you some interesting ideas and concepts.
I tell you its most important advantages:
The code is compiled (and NOT interpreted like PHP), and it has a very good performance. (In a performace comparsion, it is 10-15 times faster. http://www.misfitgeek.com/pages/Perf_Stat_0809.htm)
It can be run on Windows without effort, and on Linux / Mac / etc using the Mono project.
It implements the Separation of Concerns principle very well.
It has most of the general functionality you'll need built-in. (Such as membership, roles, database management, and so on.)