tags:

views:

539

answers:

5

I read this article and find the concept of Virtual Library Interfaces nice for runtime loading of DLLs. However it seems that they aren't available for Win32. Is this true? And if so: Why? I don't see what would tie the idea to .NET.

EDIT: I'm mostly rephrasing here what Rob already wrote. :-)
I'm not after plugins or similar - it's about plain old Win32 DLLs. What appeals to me is the idea to let the compiler deal with all the details of loading a DLL at runtime - no need to call GetProcAddress for every function in the DLL etc.

+3  A: 

There are a number of Win32 options for this type of functionality. Project JEDI has an open source plugin system as part of the JVCL that loads either DLLs or packages, and can include forms and whatnot as additional functionality.

There are also a number of commercial products available, including the TMS Plugin Framework and RemObjects Hydra.

Tim Sullivan
+1  A: 

This is nothing new or special. The article's just talking about plugins. Native code's been able to do plugins for years. The only special thing about P/Invoke is that it allows native code and .NET to talk to each other in a plugin system, and the little trick where "the DLL can be seen as a singleton object that implements the interface [so that] you can use the Supports function from the Borland.Delphi.Win32 unit to check if the DLL and all the methods are available."

If you want to do what the article's talking about in Delphi for Win32, look at the LoadLibrary, GetProcAddress and FreeLibrary Windows API functions. If you absolutely must have an interface like the article describes, you have to write it yourself, either in the DLL (if you wrote the DLL yourself) by writing an exported function that returns an interface, or in the calling app, by writing a function that uses GetProcAddress to create an interface dynamically. (Caution: this requires mucking around with pointers, and is usually more trouble than it's worth.)

Your best bet is probably just to do what Tim Sullivan mentioned: use TJvPluginManager from the JEDI VCL if you only need native code, or Hydra if you have to talk to .NET assemblies.

Mason Wheeler
A: 

I've used Hydra myself for a Delphi only solution (i.e., didn't interface to .NET) and it works great for that too. It's easier to use and adds some niceties, but I think that it's basically implemented the same way as the "roll-your-own" plugin framework that is well-described in this article: http://www.saxon.co.uk/SinglePkg/

I would look for a plugin framework that's interface-based (like Hydra and the "roll-your-own" system in above paragraph), rather than one that simply sends messages between apps.

There is a Delphi plugin framework on sourceforge, don't know whether it's the same one as in JEDI project or not: http://sourceforge.net/projects/rd-dpf

There are also a couple of other commercial solutions, one of which is Dragonsoft's: http://www.dragonsoft.us/products_dsps.php

Herbert Sitz
+3  A: 

It seems to me like the three answers so far have completely missed the point of your question. That, or I have. You're asking why Win32 Delphi doesn't have something like the magical Supports function that Hallvard's article talks about, aren't you? Namely, a function that, given the name of a DLL and the type information of an interface, returns an object that implements that interface using the standalone functions exported from the DLL.

Hydra seems to be all about calling .Net code from a Win32 program, not about importing functions from a DLL. TJvPluginManager requires that the plug-in DLLs export a special self-registration function that the manager will call when it loads the DLL, and the function must return an instance of the TJvPlugin class, so the plug-in DLL must be written in Delphi or C++ Builder. The Supports function, on the other hand, works with any DLL written in any language. You could use it on kernel32, if you wanted.

I don't know why Win32 Delphi doesn't have such a thing. Maybe CodeGear didn't see much demand for it since Delphi and Turbo Pascal had already gone for so long without it.

It's certainly possible to write a function that works like that, and I don't expect it would be any harder to write than the .Net version must have been, unless Microsoft's .Net libraries already provide most of the pieces and Delphi just wraps them up into a convenient-to-call function that looks like the several other overloaded versions of Supports that Delphi has had for years.

There would be a few steps to implementing that function in Win32. (I'm providing only a sketch of what's necessary because I don't have a running copy of Delphi handy right now. Ask nicely, and maybe I'll find more details.) First, you'd need to make sure that type information for an interface held, at a minimum, the undecorated names of its methods. Then, Supports would need to generate a function stub for each method in the interface (besides _AddRef, _Release, and QueryInterface). The stub would go something like this, assuming the calling convention is stdcall:

asm
  // Pop the return address,
  // discard the "this" pointer,
  // and restore the return address
  pop eax
  pop ecx
  push eax

  jmp AddressOfFunction
end;

As Supports generated each stub, it would fill in the actual function address, gotten from calling GetProcAddress with the name of the corresponding interface method. The stdcall calling convention is easy to wrap like that; cdecl is a little cumbersome; register is a pain in the neck.

Once it has all the stubs generated, it would need to generate an "object" that looks like it implements the given interface. It doesn't have to be an actual class. At compile time, Supports doesn't know the layout of the interface it's going to be asked to implement, so having a class wouldn't accomplish much.

The final step is to provide implementations of the _AddRef, _Release, and QueryInterface. _AddRef would be unremarkable; _Release is where you'd call FreeLibrary when the reference count reached zero; QueryInterface wouldn't do much at all, except claim that it supports IUnknown and the interface given to Supports.

Delphi used to come with a sample program that demonstrated implementing an interface without any classes at all. It was all done with records and function pointers (which is all an interface ultimately is, after all). Delphi also came with the corresponding code to do it with classes, in part to show how much easier Delphi can make things. I can't find the name of the demo program now, but I'm sure it's still around somewhere.

Rob Kennedy
I addressed that briefly in my response. This is the "ugly mucking around with pointers" stuff I didn't want to go into. Oh, and as a side-bonus, it also involves ugly mucking around in assembly. I forgot that part! :P
Mason Wheeler
Actually, not assembly. Machine code. The assembly I wrote above is just for illustrative purposes. You'd have to put in the machine code directly because you'd be generating code at run time, and there is no run-time assembler available.
Rob Kennedy
+1, thoughtful answer, and with nice explanation of the technical details. Thanks for taking the time to write it.
mghie
Thanks a lot for your answer. I have to look for that demo - I never noticed that Delphi comes with demos for such "unusual" issues. (Now that I think of it I remember some blog post about fake interfaces.) And maybe I find some spare time to play with the bits you gave me. :-)
Ulrich Gerhardt
It was a shell-extension demo. A context-menu handler to compile DPR files, maybe?
Rob Kennedy
Two more links, for someone interested in implementing this, also from Hallvard: http://hallvards.blogspot.com/2006/06/simple-interface-rtti.html and http://hallvards.blogspot.com/2006/08/extended-interface-rtti.html
Rob Kennedy
A: 

What is wrong with doing this with simple com objects? Declare a simple interface that all of your plugins implement, and require that each com object include an exported function that returns its class guid. Then using the "plugins" is as simple as walking thru the plugins directory looking for DLL's which expose the special registration function, invoking it and then using the class guid to then invoke the com object.

I used something like this in a WIN32 commercial application with great success. The advantage was I could switch plugins in and out at will (provided of course the application wasn't running to remove existing ones), the magic was all in the interface that each one implemented.

skamradt
That's basically the way TJvPluginManager works under the hood, except it has some other tricks instead of COM.
Mason Wheeler
The DLLs whose functions you want to call won't necessarily export any COM objects. I'm really confused: Where did everyone else get the idea that Ulrich is asking about plug-ins!?
Rob Kennedy
The function doesn't export the com object, it only returns the guid necessary to access the instance of the com object in the dll. Yes, its plugins, thats the point. Adding features at runtime and late binding, sure sounds alot like a plugin archtecture is called for.
skamradt
What I thought about when I read Hallvard's article was stuff like "Load UxTheme DLL when it's available" which Borland/Mike Lischke solved manually with lots of function pointers and which maybe could be solved more elegantly with an approach like VLI.
Ulrich Gerhardt