Why and when should I use C/C++ code in iOS application? - iphone

When and especially why should I switch from Objective-C to C or C++ when I develop on iOS platform. I'm sure I'm missing something but as far as I can see Apple wants developers to use Objective-C everywhere in Mac/iOS environment so why would I go with C/C++?
One note, though, I'm NOT talking about GAME DEVELOPMENT. In case of games I realize what are the advantages. I just don't get when I want to use C if I develop, for example, a client for a server or something like that (once again, not a game). All the classes I need already there and all of them in Objective-C.

Objective C is a strict superset of ANSI C, so an Objective C programmer is very likely already doing a significant amount of programming in C. In fact, many Mac and iOS APIs (audio, graphics, etc.) are C interfaces and/or use C data types.
A few of the reasons to do something in C, of things that are possible in both the superset and subset languages, might include performance and portability. There is a small amount of runtime overhead to Objective C messaging that is completely unsuitable for the inner loops of real-time audio or video image processing, etc. For portability, one can often use well encapsulated C code in iOS, Linux, Android NDKs, WebOS PDKs, & etc. And occasionally the Objective C wrappers for an OS service won't offer all the flexibility of some underlying C API.
The only reason I can see to use C++ for an iOS app might be to use some legacy C++ code and maintain some consistency of style with that code for readability, maintainability, etc.
For an iOS app where performance, or any portable code reuse is not important, there are few reasons to not just use Objective C (with its included C language), as that is what the most current documentation, tools, frameworks, and APIs for iOS are supported on.

The main advantage is portability. A chunk of code written in C++ or C can, when appropriate measures are taken, be very easily wrapped up and used in iOS or Android, or Blackberry, etc... Many 3rd party libraries go this route for that reason (Zebra Crossing and OpenCV come to mind immediately).
Another reason (and I would argue bad reason) is simply that a developer is comfortable in C or C++ and wants to avoid learning Objective-C as much as possible.

The only reasons I can think of are (a) you have an existing C++ codebase that you want to re-use (and don't want to have to rewrite it all in Objective C), or (b) you really like C++ and/or really don't like Objective C.

Why not mix and match as you like. The compiler supports "objective c++". Not sure that it supports C++11 features in such a mode, but it should support C++98 well. I think all that is required is that you change the naming of your source files from ".m" to ".mm". (This is all from memory and could be inaccurate).
As to the "why". Some apple APIs had more features in one language than the other. For example it used to be (and may still be) that a bunch of the graphics / quicktime functionality was only available through the cocoa interfaces, and not the objective C interfaces.
It is even more likely that some third party libraries may only be available in one language.

Related

Porting Windows/Mac application, written in Ada, to iOS

I am in possession of a dictionary application (takes in text as input, outputs definitions + grammar analysis). I have all the source files (about 50 pages of code), written in Ada, as well as Windows and Unix executables. I want to be able to use this dictionary in an iOS app.
I'm not at all familiar with Ada, so my question is, in a nutshell—are there any shortcuts to somehow wrap the application and use it on iOS? Or is the only way just re-writing the entire application in C/Objective-C?
Shark8 mentioned JVM-targeted Ada. ACT sells a version of Gnat that targets the JVM. However, I do not believe iOS devices currently run Java. Apple does not want to lose control of the platform, so they do not allow any development environments other than their own, which is Objective C based. I understand the Java folks are working to fix this, but even if they do Apple will probably refuse to allow any such app into their online store. Note that this is not a problem unique to Ada. Any app written in any language other than C or Objective C has the same problem with iOS. (This is one of the many reasons why developers tend to prefer to target Android platforms than iOS).
So what you really need is something that can get your code compilable with Apple's Objective C compiler. Supposedly Objective C is a strict superset of C. If this is true for Apple's implementation, then an Ada compiler that outputs compilable C sources should do the job for you.
Fortunately, there is such an Ada compiler (or at least there used to be). AdaMagic at one point had C available as a "target". It is now sold by SofCheck. When last I saw a discussion of it years and years ago, they referred to it as a "service" as much as a compiler, so it may not be cheap. But if you have a real business need, it would certainly be cheaper than spending man-years rewriting a working app.
Your other option of course would be to say "Screw Apple and their facist OS", and shoot for Android instead. Sadly, for business reasons, that may not be feasible. :-(
Update (2016/2012): The assets of SofCheck have become available from AdaCore, as the two companies have merged in early 2012.
I want to be able to use this dictionary in an iOS app.
Well, if there is an Ada compiler that targets iOS -- and there probably is considering that GCC has an Ada front-end -- then re-using the packages should be straight-forward so long as the source isn't compiler- (for a different compiler) or architecture-specific.
The most experience I have with porting Ada to other architectures was to port some code I had compiling to the native machine to the JVM (there's an Ada compiler which targets the JVM); the "gotchas" were more along the line of the JVM's case-sensitivity interacting with Ada's case insensitivity for naming classes and packages.

How much of the "Objective-C" I'm learning is universal Objective-C, and not Apple's frameworks?

This question is related to one of my others about C: What can you do in C without “std” includes? Are they part of “C,” or just libraries?
I've become curious lately as to what is really contained the the core Objective-C language, and what parts of the Objective-C I've done for iPhone/OS X development is specific to Apple platforms.
I know that things like syntax are the same, but for instance, is NSObject and its torrent of NS-subclasses actually part of "standard" Objective-C? Could I use them in, say, Windows?
What parts are universal for the most part, and what parts would I only find on an Apple platform?
If you want, giving an example of Objective-C used elsewhere as an example of what is more "universal" would help me as well.
Thanks! =)
There are only two current implementations of the core Objective-C libraries, previously known as the NextStep (hence NS prefixes) and OPENSTEP: GNUStep and Apple's OS X. On Linux, if you maintain compatibility with the OPENSTEP specification, GNUStep works very well. However, the specification is ancient, and modern code for OS X will likely not work correctly (especially in the UI area). The situation on Windows is even worse.
You can use the Objective-C language anywhere GCC supports the build target. The "NS" classes are not part of the language proper.
If you're trying to maintain compatibility across platforms in your code base, stick to C or C++, only move UI specific behavior to Objective-C.
Objective-c is C plus these keywords:
#interface, #implementation, #protocol, #end, #private, #protected, #public, #try,
#throw, #catch, #finally, #class, #selector, #encode, #"string", #synchronized,
#property, #synthesized
Plus the message sending syntax: [anObject aMessage];
EDIT
Given that you have an objective-c compiler such as GCC you still need an Objective-c runtime in order to make the above stuff work. e.g. [anObject aMessage] is actually compiled to
objc_msgSend( anObject, #selector(aMessage));
...therefore the symbol objc_msgSend is one of several that must exist at runtime. In theory this could be provided by a compiler intrinsic but in practice you are probably going to link to an Objective-c runtime library - a quick search of my hard drive shows i have three installed:- Apple's, GNUStep, and Cocotron - there are more but Apple's (open source) is without doubt the most important and influential.
With an Objective-c compiler and runtime - but without any Apple Objective-c frameworks (NSObject, etc.) - you have a fabulous and very useful C-with-Classses that is much simpler (where simpler means 'better for me') than C++.
You can a lot on Windows using Cocotron, which is a free implementation of Apple's frameworks. It's not complete, and you may run into bugs, but if you're lucky, you can compile your Xcode project as a Windows app without too many changes.
None of the class library is part of the language itself. If you want to see the core Objective-C types, look in include/objc. The core language itself, without any added library, is really scant and not particularly useful.
In practice, however, Objective-C is just about never used outside of the context of an OpenStep framework like Cocoa or GNUstep. So you could view that as the de facto standard library, in which case Foundation is almost universal. (Not 100% of Foundation is that way, but the majority is.)

Interpret Objective C scripts at runtime on iPhone?

Is there anyway to load an objective c script at runtime, and run it against the classes/methods/objects/functions in the current iPhone app?
MAJOR NOTE: The major reason I'd like to do this is to allow me to rapidly prototype an application, and then, after I'm done a major prototyping phase, take the scripts I was writing and compile them at build time instead. I don't ever plan on shipping an app with an objective c interpreter in it.
The reason i ask is that I've been playing around with iPhone wax, a lua interpreter that can be embedded in an iPhone app, and it works very nicely, in the sense that any object/method/function that's publically available in your Objective C code is automatically bridged, and available in lua.
This allows you to rapidly prototype applications by simply making the core of your app be lua files that are in the users documents directory. Just reload the app, and you can test out changes to your lua files without needing to rebuild the app in XCode - a big time saver!
But, with Apples recent 3.1.3 SDK stuff, it got me thinking that the safest approach for doing this type of rapid prototypeing would be if you could use Objective C as the interpreted code... That way, worst case scenario, you could just compile it into your app before your release instead. I have heard that the lua source can be compiled to byte code, and linked in at build time, but I think the ultimate safe thing would be if the scripted source was in objective c, not lua. That way your source is always in objective c, regardless.
This leads me to wondering (i've searched, but come up with nothing) if there are any examples on how to embed an Objective C Interpreter in an iPhone app? This would allow you to rapidly prototype your app against the current classes that are built into your binary, and, when your about to deploy your app, instead of running the classes through the in app interpreter, you compile them in instead.
With the iPad and OS 4, bluetooth and virtual keyboards can work with iPhones and iPads... That's going to make this type of rapid prototyping something much more useful, at least for dev time. If you have an interpreter built into your app and have it on your iPad, for example, you can code against the interpreter while on the road, without XCode. And to me, the most useful way to get the source back to an "apple approved" state would be if the scripts were Objective C.
Objective-C is really just C with a runtime and some syntactic sugar. It's an inherently compiled language (I don't think there are any production-ready interpreters for C, although I might be wrong).
Xcode used to have a feature called ZeroLink to speed up compile time, but removed it in Xcode 3 because it caused too many bugs.
It's not exactly impossible, but it wouldn't be easy enough to be worth it. Objective-C isn't normally an interpreted language. This isn't insurmountable — interpreted vs. compiled is just an implementation choice in most cases. For example, Ruby is traditionally considered an interpreted scripting language, but MacRuby compiles it down to code just like Objective-C produces. So it would be possible to write an interpreter for Objective-C, but nobody has done this. You would have to write it yourself.
Also, the rules forbid interpreters other than Apple's Javascript interpreter. So far this hasn't been enforced on anyone, but if you're trying to be a very straight arrow, interpreted code is unfortunately out as well.
Well, there's a couple worthwhile points to bring up:
Why interpret Objective-C code when you can compile it? I understand the "rapid prototyping" idea, but part of the reason to do that in, e.g., Lua, is because Lua is a much terser language than Objective-C. I don't know if interpreting Objective-C will have as much of a bonus.
If you want to have plugins or dynamically-loadable modules in your app, you can always compile them as a separate bundle and load them, using NSBundle or a similar mechanism.
All that said, I don't know of any Objective-C interpreters. You'd likely have to write your own. I'm not sure if it would violate Apple's guidelines or not: it'd still be Objective-C code, but I thought they had rules against interpreted code, too. (I suppose they never envisioned a hypothetical scenario in which Objective-C was interpreted, though.)
There is a basic Objective-C interpreter:
Check out the posting:
Is there an Objective-C Interpreter for the Mac?
Also:
http://forrst.com/posts/Beginnings_of_a_Objective_C_Interpreter-Tdl
Ch is a commercial C/C++ interpreter. It's made by a company called SoftIntegration.
Not on IPhone, but on Simulator, you can do this with
Dynamic Code Injection Tool
http://dyci.github.com/
There's also another tool, that works a little different way, but allows same functionality
http://injectionforxcode.com/
You should take a look at cycript. You can hook into apps, replace methods on the fly, change variables, you-name-it. It's an hybrid language between Objective-C and JavaScript.
You'll need to jailbreak your iDevice to install it.
Take a look at the documentation for objc_msgSend() and other parts of the Objective-C Runtime Reference. You can essentially parse text and send it to the runtime.

Why does Apple use Objective-C?

Why did Apple decide to use Objective-C for the iPhone SDK and not C++?
It seems strange to me that they would not have chosen a language more popular than Objective-C. Is it because wanted to have something unique in their application which is not otherwise in general use?
Apple merged with NeXT in the '90s and Mac OS X was made from NeXT's operating system, NeXTSTEP. Objective-C was the official language of NeXTSTEP's application frameworks, which became Mac OS X's Cocoa. Mac OS X was then adapted into the iPhone OS, and Cocoa was made into Cocoa Touch. Objective-C has held up pretty well all along the way, and a lot of Cocoa's features would be difficult to translate into C++.
So essentially, it all comes from NeXT.
Objective C began life in 1983 I believe, created by Brad Cox and Tom Love. The idea of Objective-C was to take the purity and low-level control of C and merge that with true object-oriented features that would allow companies to customize system libraries that could communicate with the OOP layer of Obj-C. Essentially, it worked. Obj-C is a strict superset of C, unlike C++ which is most of C, but with many differences.
When Steve Jobs founded NeXT Computer (1985), he brought in some of his former Apple team and others. His best programmers were interested in using a language that expanded on C with the same speed benefits and system control. They chose Objective-C. NeXT eventually wrote many libraries and methods for the base language. These all begin with NS for Next Step. This was the name of the NeXT OS. By 1989 the Next Step OS was considered to be vastly superior to MS Windows or Mac OS, and many computer companies wanted to license it badly. Jobs simply didn't want to go in that direction.
Once Apple wised up and brought Steve Jobs back into the fold (1996), the infusion of Next Step OS into the new Mac OS X was really the key to Apple reviving its software and its programming strategy.
While C++ remains a truly excellent and powerful language, I find that Objective C has less flaws (just my opinion), and Apple's continued work on Cocoa libraries has made the Obj-C language a truly modern power with C underpinnings. Is it better than Java? Not sure. But for what it is primarily designed for (Mac OS, iOS) it is astonishingly good, if a bit overly verbose.
The greatest criticism of Obj-C is the syntactical styling, but any programmer that truly learns the language will quickly learn of its amazing power and seemless fit with all things Mac, iPhone, iPad.
Will any other platforms ultimately adopt Obj-C? not sure, but doubtful. But the Cocoa libraries are truly wonderful.
It's because Objective C has been the de facto language for Mac OS X development before it was Mac OS X. When Jobs left Apple to set up NeXT, the language Objective C was developed as a specific language that wasn't C++ and avoided many of its pitfalls. It therefore makes sense that any portable or consumer equipment (including Apple TV) use Objective C as their primary development language, and dropping down to the underlying C layer when needed for performance or interface issues.
Objective-C adds object oriented programming to C. It was used for NeXT, upon which a lot of OSX is derived. It supports all of C, and is simpler than C++.
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2091191
Note that Objective-C is not a new language. It's been around since 1986 - well before Java or C#!
It has been in general use ever since NeXT, many real-world applications are around that make use of it.
Apple answered this very question here in 2010:
The Objective-C language was chosen for a variety of reasons. First
and foremost, it’s an object-oriented language. The kind of
functionality that’s packaged in the Cocoa frameworks can only be
delivered through object-oriented techniques. Second, because
Objective-C is an extension of standard ANSI C, existing C programs
can be adapted to use the software frameworks without losing any of
the work that went into their original development. Because
Objective-C incorporates C, you get all the benefits of C when working
within Objective-C. You can choose when to do something in an
object-oriented way (define a new class, for example) and when to
stick to procedural programming techniques (define a structure and
some functions instead of a class).
Moreover, Objective-C is a fundamentally simple language. Its syntax
is small, unambiguous, and easy to learn. Object-oriented programming,
with its self-conscious terminology and emphasis on abstract design,
often presents a steep learning curve to new recruits. A
well-organized language like Objective-C can make becoming a
proficient object-oriented programmer that much less difficult.
Compared to other object-oriented languages based on C, Objective-C is
very dynamic. The compiler preserves a great deal of information about
the objects themselves for use at runtime. Decisions that otherwise
might be made at compile time can be postponed until the program is
running. Dynamism gives Objective-C programs unusual flexibility and
power. For example, it yields two big benefits that are hard to get
with other nominally object-oriented languages:
Objective-C supports an open style of dynamic binding, a style that
can accommodate a simple architecture for interactive user interfaces.
Messages are not necessarily constrained by either the class of the
receiver or even the method name, so a software framework can allow
for user choices at runtime and permit developers freedom of
expression in their design. (Terminology such as dynamic binding,
message, class, and receiver are explained in due course in this
document.) Dynamism enables the construction of sophisticated
development tools. An interface to the runtime system provides access
to information about running applications, so it’s possible to develop
tools that monitor, intervene, and reveal the underlying structure and
activity of Objective-C applications.
Historical note: As a language, Objective-C has a long history. It was
created at the Stepstone company in the early 1980s by Brad Cox and
Tom Love. It was licensed by NeXT Computer Inc. in the late 1980s to
develop the NeXTStep frameworks that preceded Cocoa. NeXT extended the
language in several ways, for example, with the addition of protocols.

Shared Library for iPhone and BlackBerry

I have a set of functionality (classes) that I would like to share with an application I'm building for the iPhone and for the Blackberry (Java). Does anyone have any best practices on doing this?
This is not going to be possible as far as I understand your question - the binary format for the iPhone and Java are not compatible - and even for a native library on a blackberry device.
This is not like building for OS X where you can use Java unfornately the iPhone doesn't support Java.
The best idea is probably to build you library in Objective-C and then port it to Java which is an easier transition than going the other way. If you programme for Objective-C and make sure you code has no memory leaks - then the changes are not so complex.
If you keep the structure of your classes the same then you should find maintenance much simpler - fix a bug in the Java and you should find it easy to check for the same bug in the ObjC methods etc.
Hope this helps - sorry that it is not all good news.
As Grouchal mentioned - you are not going to be able to share any physical components of your application between the two platforms. However you should be able to share the logical design of your application if you carefully separate it into highly decoupled layers. This is still a big win because the logical application design probably accounts for a large part of your development effort.
You could aim to wrap the sections of the platform specific APIs (iPhone SDK etc.) that you use with your own interfaces. In doing so you are effectively hiding the platform specific libraries and making your design and code easier to manage when dealing with differences in the platforms.
With this in place you can write your core application code so that it appears very similar on either platform - even though they are written in different languages. I find Java and Objective-C to be very similar conceptually (at least at the level at which I use it) and would expect to be able to achieve parity with at least the following:
An almost identical set of Java and Objective-C classes with the same names and responsibilities
Java/Objective-C classes with similarly named methods
Java/Objective-C methods with the same responsibilities and logical implementations
This alone will make the application easier to understand across platforms. Of course the code will always look very different at the edges - i.e when you start dealing with the view, threading, networking etc. However, these concerns will be handled by your API wrappers which once developed should have fairly static interfaces.
You might also stand to benefit if you later developer further applications that need to be delivered to both platforms as you might find that you can reuse or extend your API wrappers.
If you are writing a client-server type application you should also try and keep as much logic on your server as possible. Keep the amount of extra business logic on the device to a minimum. The more you can just treat the device as a view layer the less porting you'll have to do over all.
Aside from that, following the same naming conventions and package structure across all the projects helps greatly, especially for your framework code.
The UI API's and usability paradigms for BlackBerry and iPhone are so different that it won't be possible in most cases to directly port this kind of logic between apps. The biggest mistake one could make (in my opinion) is to try and transplant a user experience designed for one mobile platform on to another. The way people interact with BlackBerrys vs iPhones is very different so be prepared to revamp your user experience for each mobile platform you want to deploy on.
Hope this is helpful.
It is possible to write C++ code that works in both a BB10 Native app and an iOS app.
XCode would need to see the C++ files as ObjectiveCPP code.
I am currently working on such a task in my spare time. I have not yet completed it enough to either show or know if it is truly possible, but I haven't run in to any road-blocks yet.
You will need to be disciplined to write good cross-platform code designed w/ abstractions for platform-specific features.
My general pattern is that I have "class Foo" to do cross platform stuff, and a "class FooPlatform" to do platform specific stuff.
Class "Foo" can call class "FooPlatform" which abstracts out anything platform specific.
The raw cross-platform code is itself not compile-able on its own.
Separate BB10 and XCode projects are created in their respective IDEs.
Each project implements a thin (few [dozen] line) "class FooPlatform" and references the raw cross-platform code.
When I get something working that I can show I will post again here...