Made a new window application. Right-clicked Frameworks > Add Existing Frameworks. Selected Frameworks folder, then AudioToolbox.framework.
Build, and 11 crashes.
#elif defined __ppc__ || __ppc64__
#define _IntSaturate(x) ((int) (x))
#else
#error "Unknown architecture."
// To use unoptimized standard C code, remove above line.
#define _IntSaturate(x) ((x) <= -0x1p31f ? (int) -0x80000000 : \
0x1p31f <= (x) ? (int) 0x7fffffff : (int) (x))
#endif
Tried commenting that line, then MachineExceptions still crashes:
typedef CALLBACK_API_C( OSStatus , ExceptionHandlerProcPtr )(ExceptionInformation * theException);
error: expected ")" before '*' token
..what the hell happened? I'm 99.9% sure I've never modified the AudioToolbox or any other framework.
Just scrapped the project, copied main classes and everything working smoothly again.
Related
I'm trying to move one of my apps over to using Swift. It contains an OpenGL draw loop (that also contains some Cocoa statements - yes, I realise it's probably a horrible mess of a class) so I've copied the original .m & .h files into my new project and added a *-Bridging-Header.h file. I've also added a build phase to link with the OpenGL.framework (although I'm not sure I needed to and it made no difference to the issue).
Originally I borrowed heavily from Apple's example OpneGL project and within one of the files I'm trying to compile there is:
#include "sourceUtil.h"
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#import <OpenGL/OpenGL.h>
demoSource* srcLoadSource(const char* filepathname)
{
demoSource* source = (demoSource*) calloc(sizeof(demoSource), 1);
// Check the file name suffix to determine what type of shader this is
const char* suffixBegin = filepathname + strlen(filepathname) - 4;
if(0 == strncmp(suffixBegin, ".fsh", 4))
{
source->shaderType = GL_FRAGMENT_SHADER;
}
else if(0 == strncmp(suffixBegin, ".vsh", 4))
{
source->shaderType = GL_VERTEX_SHADER;
}
else
{
// Unknown suffix
source->shaderType = 0;
}
// more code follows
.
}
However, GL_FRAGMENT_SHADER is causing Xcode to stop any build with the error "Use of undeclared identifier 'GL_FRAGMENT_SHADER'" - similarly with the GL_VERTEX_SHADER. I presume there'll be more errors but currently this is what Xcode stops at.
You need: #import <OpenGL/gl.h>
I am trying to add libpng to my iPhone project.
I copied the .c and .h files to their own directory "thirdparty/libpng/" and I included png.h in my texture class:
#ifndef PNG_H
#include "thirdparty/libpng/png.h"
#endif
At this point my project compiles great with no warnings and errors.
Next I tried adding a function to check if a texture is a png, and I get a compile error on png_sig_cmp, even though png.h is included:
#define PNG_BYTES_TO_CHECK 4
int GETexture::CheckIfValidPNGTexture( const char* pTextureName, FILE **ppFp )
{
char buf[PNG_BYTES_TO_CHECK];
/* Open the prospective PNG file. */
if ((*ppFp = fopen(pTextureName, "rb")) == NULL)
return 0;
/* Read in some of the signature bytes */
if (fread(buf, 1, PNG_BYTES_TO_CHECK, *ppFp) != PNG_BYTES_TO_CHECK)
return 0;
/* Compare the first PNG_BYTES_TO_CHECK bytes of the signature.
Return nonzero (true) if they match */
return(!png_sig_cmp(buf, (png_size_t)0, PNG_BYTES_TO_CHECK)); // <- COMPILE ERROR
}
The error I get is: No matching function for call to 'png_sig_cmp'
The header is definitely getting included. If I try to type something random in it like "sdfdd" I get a compile error, showing it is parsing that header file.
Any ideas?
I had exactly the same problem once and what helped me was simple casting - because if you look into png.h header file , png_sig_cmp definition :
png_sig_cmp(png_const_bytep sig, png_size_t start, png_size_t num_to_check)
First parameter is png_const_bytep - which is defined as :
PNG_CONST png_byte FAR * png_const_bytep
which translated really as :
const unsigned char*
I would simple typecast :
return(!png_sig_cmp((png_const_bytep)buf, (png_size_t)0, PNG_BYTES_TO_CHECK));
Hope it helps!
I'm using Eclipse 4.2, with CDT, and MinGW toolchain on a Windows machine (although I've a feeling the problem has nothing to do with this specific configuration). The G++ compiler is 4.7
I'm playing with c++11 features, with the following code:
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
#include <memory>
#include <vector>
#include <list>
#include <algorithm>
using namespace std;
int main( int argc, char* argv[] )
{
vector<int> v { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 };
int x {5};
auto mark = remove_if( v.begin(), v.end(), [x](int n) { return n<x; } );
v.erase( mark, v.end() );
for( int x : v ) { cout << x << ", "; }
cout << endl;
}
Everything is very straight forward and idiomatic c++11. The code compiles with no problems on the command line (g++ -std=c++11 hello.cpp).
In order to make this code compile In eclipse, I set the compiler to support C++11:
Properties -> C/C++ Build -> Settings -> Miscellaneous -> Ohter Flags:
I'm adding -std=c++11
Properties -> C/C++Build -> Discovery Options -> Compiler invocation arguments:
Adding -std=c++11
That's the only change I did to either the global preferences or to the project properties.
First Question: Why do I've to change the flags in two places? When each compiler flags is used?
If I hit Ctrl-B, the project will build successfully, as expected, and running it from within eclipse show the expected result (It prints: '5, 6, 7,').
However, the editor view shows red marks of error on both the 'remove_if' line, and the 'v.erase' line. Similarly, the Problems view shows I've these two problems. Looking at the details of the problem, I get:
For the remove_if line: 'Invalid arguments. Candidates are: #0 remove_if(#0, #0, #1)
For the erase line: 'Invalid arguments Candidates are: '? erase(?), ? erase(?,?)'
Second questions: It appears there are two different builds: one for continues status, and one for the actual build. Is that right? If so, do they have different rule (compilation flags, include paths, etc.)?
Third question: In the problem details I also see: 'Name resolution problem found by the indexer'. I guess this is why the error message are so cryptic. Are those messages coming from MinGW g++ compiler or from Eclipse? What is this Name resolution? How do I fix?
Appreciate your help.
EDIT (in reply to #Eugene): Thank you Eugene. I've opened a bug on Eclipse. I think that C++11 is only partially to blame. I've cleaned my code from C++11 stuff, and removed the -std=c++11 flag from both compilation switch. And yet, the CodAn barks on the remove_if line:
int pred( int n ) { return n < 5; }
int main( int argc, char* argv[] )
{
vector<int> v;
for( int i=0; i<=7; ++i ) {
v.push_back( i );
}
vector<int>::iterator mark = remove_if( v.begin(), v.end(), pred );
v.erase( mark, v.end() );
for( vector<int>::iterator i = v.begin(); i != v.end(); ++i ) {
cout << *i << ", ";
}
cout << endl;
}
The code compiles just fine (with Ctrl-B), but CodAn doesn't like the remove_if line, saying: Invalid Arguments, Candidates are '#0 remove_if(#0,#0,#1)'.
This is a very cryptic message - it appears it misses to substitute arguments in format string (#0 for 'iterator' and #1 for 'predicate'). I'm going to update the bug.
Interestingly, using 'list' instead of 'vector' clears up the error.
However, as for my question, I'm curious about how the CodAn work. Does it uses g++ (with a customized set of flags), or another external tool (lint?), or does it do it internally in Java? If there is a tool, how can I get its command line argument, and its output?
Build/Settings - these flags will be included into your makefile to do actual build. Build/Discovery - these flags will be passed to a compiler when "scanner settings" are discovered by IDE. IDE will run compiler in a special mode to discover values of the predefined macros, include paths, etc.
I believe, the problems you are seeing are detected by "Codan". Codan is a static analysis built into the CDT editor, you may find its settings on "C/C++ General"/"Code Analysis". You should report the problem to the bugs.eclipse.org if you feel the errors shown are bogus. Note that CDT does not yet support all C++11 features.
I read a very interesting blog about implementing some anti-piracy protection into your apps. Some of them dont work anymore, some of them do. The 2 ones that still are effective to an extent are the 2 last ones listed.
http://shmoopi.wordpress.com/2011/06/19/27/
The one I'm interested in is the very last one. Code below. I've implemented this in my AppDelegate.m
Anti piracy via the encryption check.
Required Headers
#import <dlfcn.h>
#import <mach-o/dyld.h>
#import <TargetConditionals.h>
Encryption Struct
#if TARGET_IPHONE_SIMULATOR && !defined(LC_ENCRYPTION_INFO)
#define LC_ENCRYPTION_INFO 0x21
struct encryption_info_command
{
uint32_t cmd;
uint32_t cmdsize;
uint32_t cryptoff;
uint32_t cryptsize;
uint32_t cryptid;
};
#endif
Needed Methods
int main (int argc, char *argv[]);
static BOOL is_encrypted ()
{
const struct mach_header *header;
Dl_info dlinfo;
/* Fetch the dlinfo for main() */
if (dladdr(main, &dlinfo) == 0 || dlinfo.dli_fbase == NULL)
{
NSLog(#"Could not find main() symbol (very odd)");
return NO;
}
header = dlinfo.dli_fbase;
/* Compute the image size and search for a UUID */
struct load_command *cmd = (struct load_command *) (header+1);
for (uint32_t i = 0; cmd != NULL && i < header->ncmds; i++)
{
/* Encryption info segment */
if (cmd->cmd == LC_ENCRYPTION_INFO)
{
struct encryption_info_command *crypt_cmd = (struct encryption_info_command *) cmd;
/* Check if binary encryption is enabled */
if (crypt_cmd->cryptid < 1)
{
return NO;
}
return YES;
}
cmd = (struct load_command *) ((uint8_t *) cmd + cmd->cmdsize);
}
return NO;
}
This method checks to see if the binary is still encrypted.
When I run this on the device attached to x-code it gives me a false positive on this line
if (crypt_cmd->cryptid < 1)
{
NSLog(#"Pirated from (crypt_cmd->cryptid < 1) ");
return NO;
}
I was wondering is it possible that the builds xcode puts onto the device for debugging purposes not encrypted? And its only encrypted when the build is submitted to Apple for use on iTunes. Hence why I am getting this false positive when check the code.
Many Thanks,
-Code
This code won't work successfully on a 64-bit device like the iPhone 5s. The header has been changed from mach_header to mach_header_64 and the command ID is now LC_ENCRYPTION_INFO_64.
What I did was to read the header and then see what the magic number was. If it's MH_MAGIC_64 then you're on a 64-bit device and you need to use the mach_header_64 struct and look for LC_ENCRYPTION_INFO_64 (defined as 0x2C) instead of LC_ENCRYPTION_INFO.
A better otool command to see whether a file is encrypted or not is:
otool -arch armv7 -l YourAppName | grep crypt
I have been looking into this recently as well and tested with the same results. It turns out this code is telling you YES or NO based on whether the binary is encrypted with Apple's FairPlay DRM. Any debug or ad-hoc builds you do will say NO.
You can see the same information on your binary or any iPhone apps you have purchased using the otool command-line tool.
For your own binaries, find the binary in your project under e.g. build/Debug-iphoneos/MyApp.app and run (from Terminal)
otool -l MyApp | more
Scan through for cryptid in the LC_ENCRYPTION_INFO section. Since this is a debug build it will be 0. If you have synched your phone to your computer, check under ~/Music/iTunes/Mobile Applications and pick an .ipa file. Unzip it and try otool against the binary from the .ipa and it should have 1 for the cryptid.
It looks like this is looking for the signature block in the dyload header. This means that you're only going to see this on code which is signed. Chances are that your code isn't being automatically signed for debugging (unnecessary), although it will be signed when it goes to the device.
You might want to make this entire check conditional on the project running on an iOS device instead of in the simulator. Any binary sent to an iOS device must be signed.
#if !(TARGET_IPHONE_SIMULATOR)
your check
#endif //
I have a few lines of assembler arm code in an .s file. Just a few routines i need to call. It works fine when building for the device, however when i switch to iPhone Simulator i get "no such instruction" errors. I tried to compile parts of the .s file conditionally with what i know:
#if !TARGET_IPHONE_SIMULATOR
But the assembler doesn't recognize these preprocessor directives (of course) and none of the conditional compilation techniques for assembler that i could remember or find worked, so i'm scratching my head now on how to avoid compilation of that assembler code when building for the Simulator. I also don't see a project option in Xcode that would allow me to compile the file or not depending on the target platform.
SOLVED:
All i was missing was the proper #import in the assembler file. I did not think of adding it because Xcode syntax highlighted any preprocessor directive in green (comment) which made me assume that these commands are not recognized when in fact they work just fine.
This works:
#import "TargetConditionals.h"
#if !TARGET_IPHONE_SIMULATOR
... asm code here ...
#endif
You do do it with a pre-processor macro. They are defined in TargetConditionals.h TARGET_IPHONE_SIMULATOR should be there! (You do need to #include it however.)
Here is code I use to detect ARM vs Thumb vs Simulator:
#include "TargetConditionals.h"
#if defined(__arm__)
# if defined(__thumb__)
# define COMPILE_ARM_THUMB_ASM 1
# else
# define COMPILE_ARM_ASM 1
# endif
#endif
#if TARGET_IPHONE_SIMULATOR
// Simulator defines
#else
// ARM or Thumb mode defines
#endif
// And here is how you might use it
uint32_t
test_compare_shifted_operand(uint32_t w1) {
uint32_t local;
#if defined(COMPILE_ARM_ASM)
const uint32_t shifted = (1 << 8);
__asm__ __volatile__ (
"mov %[w2], #1\n\t"
"cmp %[w2], %[w1], lsr #8\n\t"
"moveq %[w2], #10\n\t"
"movne %[w2], #11\n\t"
: \
[w1] "+l" (w1),
[w2] "+l" (local)
: \
[shifted] "l" (shifted)
);
#else // COMPILE_ARM_ASM
if ((w1 >> 8) == 1) {
local = 10;
} else {
local = 11;
}
#endif // COMPILE_ARM_ASM
return local;
}