I have a few scripts that I would like my program to work with. However, I would like to know if it is possible for me to store these scripts (eg. batch, javascript, vb scripts etc) in my application as a resource.
How would I go about doing this?
You can store your scripts in resource files. But for example Batch Files need to be file on disk, so you will need to unpack them before working.
There are components to store arbitrary file/files or string in DFM
For example there are such in rxLib/JediVCL but i believe many VCL libs have one or another kind of DFM Storage component.
For example i used to store Firebird Embedded database in DFM to save it into TEMP and use while running.
However that is akin for manual re-reading file into DFM each time you update it. Rather annoying to say sincerely.
One more approach is linking text into resources. You can look into DUnit sources to see how it was done. You would also have .rc file included in project, so that it would be compiler into .res when making .exe
This approach is fragile towards ansi/unicode text interpretations.
Frankly, before i found DUnit in Delphi XE2 (it was disabled due to IDE bug) i tried to make SF's vanilla DUnit to run there. And i failed - the non-unicode text files linked into resource was totally corrupt when reading with unicode-enabled Delphi.
Look here and there, try both approaches and choose the one that suits you more.
Here is a good article that explains how you can add almost anything in a resource file and compile it with your application: http://delphi.about.com/od/objectpascalide/a/embed_resources.htm
Related
I have all the files needed to open the unit and code but I can't make any changes or compile because the Project.dproj and Project.dpr files are missing. However, I have the .exe file. Is there any way by which the aforementioned files can be extracted from the .exe file?
If you have all of the source files, meaning the .pas and .dfm files, then the first thing I'd do is add them all into a new project and try to compile it. It'll either work, meaning you've got everything you need, or it will generate errors.
There would be three kinds of errors:
The first is the most likely -- the forms might use components that you don't have installed. This will be obivous if you try to open the forms in the IDE. If they open without fanfare, GREAT! If you get a warning box saying "Cannot locate component: remove references to it?" or something like that, then you're probably hosed.
The second is version-specific errors -- stuff that's old and crufty and no longer supported by the language.
Third, the program may use run-time libraries that you don't have.
The compiler adds RTTI metadata, including unit names, when it builds, and if you know about how the RTTI tables are laid out it's possible to extract this. The unit list is the principal component of the DPR file, but it takes some serious work to access it and I'm not aware of any tools out there that read the RTTI tables that have been kept up to date beyond the Delphi 7 era.
As for the .dproj file, you're out of luck. That doesn't actually contain any code that gets "compiled in" to the EXE; it's a set of build instructions for how to produce the EXE. But if the Delphi IDE doesn't have one, it can generate a default .dproj from the .dpr, if you can produce that.
I'm curious, though. How did you obtain the .pas files but not the .dpr?
The company I work for develops a system in Delphi, that contains dozens of exe modules, and each of them is identical to a certain degree if it comes to source code. Sadly, nobody has ever cared about using libraries to put the shared code in. This means that each time there is a bug fix to do in the code all these modules share, a programmer has to make corrections in all of them separately! It always takes so much time...
I decided to find a method to put the shared code into libraries. I considered DLLs and BPLs. In this case BPLs seemed much more programmer-friendly and much less troublesome, especially that the code is used only in our software and only in Delphi.
I put all the code shared by all the exe modules into BPLs and everything seems fine, but there are certain things I don't understand and would be grateful if you explained them to me.
What I expected after dividing the code into BPLs was that it would be enough to deploy exe files with the BPLs I created. But it turned out that they need an rtl100.bpl and vcl100.bpl as well. Why is it so? I want to deploy exes and my BPLs only. I don't want to provide end users with a whole bunch of libraries supplied by Borland and third party companies :). I want them to be compiled within exes as they used to be compiled before. Is it possible to do that?
What I did so far was:
I put all shared pas units to BPLs. Each BPL contains units belonging to the same category so it is clear for programmers what code to expect in a given BPL.
Each BPL is a "runtime and designtime" library.
Each BPL is "rebuilt explicitly".
The two latter are default project settings for BPLs.
And if it comes to the exe projects:
I deleted all units that I had earlier put to BPLs.
I installed my BPLs from the Tools->Install package menu in BDS 2006.
In my exe project settings I checked the option "build with runtime packages" and I listed all my BPL packages in the edit box below (only my packages, as I cleared all other ones that appeared there).
This is all I did. The exe projects compile properly, but I have no access to the source code of BPLs (I can't navigate into that code from my exe projects), even though all BPLs are stored together with their source code files. Why? It seems strange to me.
I always tend to write lengthy descriptions - sorry for that :). I will appreciate your help. I just need a few words of explanation to the points I mentioned: deploying exe with my BPLs only, the correctness of what I did as a whole, and the inability to navigate into BPL source codes. Thank you very much in advance!
Thank you all for the discussion. Some said the approach I chose was not a good idea. Our software consists of more than 100 modules (most of them being something like drivers for different devices). Most of them share the same code - in most cases classes. The problem is that those classes are not always put into separate, standalone pas units. I mean that the shared code is often put into units containing code specific to a module. This means that when you fix a bug in a shared class, it is not enough to copy the pas unit it is defined in into all software modules and recompile them. Unfortunately, you have to copy and paste the fixed pieces of code into each module, one by one, into a proper unit and class. This takes a lot of time and this is what I would like to eliminate, choosing a correct approach - please help me.
I thought that using BPLs would be a good solution, but it has some downsides, as some of you mentioned. The worst problem is that if each EXE needs several BPLs, our technical support people will have to know which EXE needs which BPLs and then provide end users with proper files. As long as we don't have a software updater, this will be a great deal for both our technicians and end user. They will certainly get lost and angry :-/.
Also compatibility issues may happen - if one BPL is shared by many EXEs, a modification of one BPL can bee good for one EXE and bad for some other ones - #Warren P.
What should I do then to make bug fixes quicker to make in so many projects? I think of one of the following approaches. If you have better ideas, please let me know.
Put shared code into separate and standalone pas units, so when there is a bug fix in one of them, it is enough to copy it to all projects (overwrite the old files) and recompile all of them.
This solution seems to be OK as far as a rearly modified code is concrened. But we also have pas units with general use functions and procedures, which often undrego modifications - we add new functions there whenever necessary, but in single projects. So imagine that you write a new function in one of the 100 modules and put it into its general use unit. After a month or two you modify a different module and you think you need the same function you wrote 2 months ago. You have to find the module (it's difficult if you don't remember which one it was) and copy the function to your code. And obviously - the general use units become completely different in each module as long as they are stored in each project separately. And then, if there is a bug fix to do... the whole story repeats.
Create BPLs for all the shared code, but link them into EXEs, so that EXEs are standalone.
For me it seems the best solution now, but there are several cons. If I do a bug fix in a BPL, each programmer will have to update the BPLs on their computer. What if they forget? But still, I think it is a minor problem. If we take care of informing each other about changes, everything should be fine.
#CodeInChaos: I don't know if I understood you properly. Do you mean sharing pas files between projects? How to do that? We store source codes in SVN. This means that we would have to store shared code in a separate folder and make all projects search for that code there, right? And download from the SVN a project and all folders it is dependent on...
Please, help me choose a good solution. I just don't want the company to lose much more time and money than necessary on bugfixes just because of a stupid approach to software development.
Thank you very much.
Even though this question has an accepted answer I'm going to take a stab at it.
The title asks how to divide a project into bpls but the real question appears to be:
"What's the best way to share code between projects?"
There are a few ways to do this:
Shared units
Dlls
BPLs
Regardless of which direction you go you will likely need to restructure your projects. From your description it sounds like each project is developed in relative isolation. Code is shared using copy/paste, which quickly gets out of sync and result in a lot of duplicated effort. So lets examine each of the techniques for sharing code.
Shared units
This is the most straightforward approach. You create a shared location and place code you would like to reuse among your projects into this location. The units are statically linked into your projects so you don't need to worry about deploying extra dependencies along with the main executables. Statically linked units are by far the easiest to troubleshoot and debug.
The compiler needs to be able to find your shared units. There are 4 ways to tell the compiler where to look.
Add them to the project - SHIFT+F11 - Adds a reference to the unit into the project files (dpr, dproj). The IDE will normally use relative paths if the unit is located under the same directory tree as the project files, otherwise it will use absolute paths, which can be problematic if developer machines aren't configured identically.
The project's Search Path - CTRL+SHIFT+F11 Delphi Compiler > Search path - Add a directory and the compiler will look there to find units mentioned in the uses clause of any unit in the project. Its best to use relative paths if you can. You can also use environment variables: $(MyPath)
Global Search Path - Tools > Options > Environment Options > Delphi Options > Library - Win32 > Library Path - Any paths listed here are available to all projects on a machine. This is machine dependant
Command line - If you build from a script or build automation tool you can set the search path using the dcc32's -U switch or msbuild's /property:UnitSearchPath= switch.
Options 1 and 2 will be the most useful.
As far as your SVN repository goes you have a few options for organizing the projects and shared units. The simplest would be to place all projects under single trunk along with the shared units:
Projects
trunk
ProjectA
ProjectB
ProjectC
Library (shared units)
If for some reason the above structure isn't possible you could try this alternative:
ProjectA
trunk
Library (branch of main library)
ProjectB
trunk
Library (branch of main library)
ProjectC
trunk
Library (branch of main library)
Library
trunk (main library)
In this configuration changes made to each project's library folder would not be immediately available to the other projects. Each project would need to synchronize changes with the main Library project on a regular basis. A side effect of this is that changes that break other projects will be delayed until the other projects are synchronized. Whether you consider this a good or bad thing depends. On the one hand bugs are easier and cheaper to fix when the code they involve is still fresh in the developer's mind. On the other hand if you don't practice unit testing (which I highly recommend you do) or the code is very fragile or you just have developers prone to making reckless changes you may want to control how frequently those changes get pushed into other projects.
Dlls
Dlls allow you to share code by linking to it at runtime. They expose functions that can be called from a main executable or another dll.
While dlls are always linked at runtime you decide whether they are loaded at application startup or only when needed. Loading at startup is called static loading and in Delphi is accomplished using the external directive. The vast majority of the rtl/vcl classes that wrap system api calls use static loading. Dynamic loading lets to delay the loading of a dll until it is required. This uses the WinAPI functions LoadLibrary and GetProcAddress. A corresponding call to FreeLibrary will unload a dll.
Unfortunately standard dlls limit what kind of datatypes can be passed. If you need to access a dll from non-Delphi projects you will need to limit yourself to using c style data types. If you will only be using a dll with Delphi projects you can safely use Delphi strings and dynamic arrays as well if you use the SharedMem unit in the dll and any projects that use it.
You can safely use object's within the dll without problems but if you want to pass objects between the dll and the application you'll need to extract the object's data and pass it as primitive types and reassemble it into an object on the other end. This is called (de)serialization or marshalling and there are much easier ways to do this than rolling your own.
COM (Component Object Model) is well supported in Delphi but it has a bit of a learning curve. Consuming COM objects is pretty straightforward but designing one will take time if you're not familiar with COM. COM has the advantage that it is language neutral and is supported in the majority of languages targeting the Windows platform (including languages targeting the .NET framework).
Bpls
Bpls (also called simply "packages") are specially formatted dlls that make working with objects a lot easier. Like standard dlls they are linked at runtime and can be statically or dynamically loaded. They are easier to learn and use than COM dlls and provide more seamles integration into your projects than COM. Packages are composed of two parts: the bpl and the dcp. The dcp is like the dcu files generated when you compile a normal unit file except it contains a whole bunch of units in it. Using a class that is compiled in a bpl is as simple as adding the dcp to the project's package list then adding a unit to a uses clause of one of the project's units.
When you deploy the app you'll need to install the bpl as well. As other's have noted you have to include the rtl package at a minimum and most likely the vcl package if you use any forms. There is a way around deploying Borland supplied bpls with your projects. You can create a "mini" rtl package that contains only the units your project need. The difficultly is in determining which units to include.
Summary
From the description you've given creating a library of shared unit files to statically link against may be the most expedient route. I would also suggest trying out a program called Simian. It will help you track down duplicate code in your code base for inclusion in your shared library. It doesn't directly support pascal but it does a decent enough job using the plain text parser with a little tweaking of its configuration.
Also I can't stress enough the value of unit testing. Especially if you're moving toward shared libraries. A suite of well written unit tests run on a frequent basis will give you instant feedback when a developer changes a class and it breaks an unrelated project.
Imagine you have a project with an EXE and two different BPL modules, and somewhere in that codebase, there's a line that says if MyObject is TStringList then DoSomething;. The is operator works by examining the object's class metadata, stored in the VMT, and then following a chain of VMTs through the ClassParent pointer, to see if any of them match the class reference (also a VMT pointer) for TStringList. In order to make sure that this will work correctly, there needs to be one single VMT for TStringList that's the same throughout your entire program, no matter how many BPLs it's divided up into, which means it has to be in its own package. That's why system runtimes like rtl*.bpl and vcl*.bpl are necessary, and there's not much you can do about that. It's part of the price of using BPLs.
As for not being able to debug, you need to make sure that the BPLs are built with debug info enabled and that the debugger knows how to find the folder where the DCP (the file containing the debug info for the BPL) is located. And you won't be able to trace into system BPLs, because debug-enabled DCPs weren't shipped with your version. They were added pretty recently, I think in XE but it might have been in D2010.
Why can't I browse my source code? Is there a way to fix this?
You can not browse the source code of the units included in the packages because they are neither in your project, your library or search path.
The way I solve this is adding the directories to the project search path. This way the compiler does not know about those files (and does not try to recompile them) but the IDE let's you browse their content and debug into them.
"In my exe project settings I checked the option "build with runtime packages"
That is why you cannot deploy without the BPL's etc - this option is confusing for a lot of developers -"build with runtime packages" means that you will need the bpl's present at runtime. Uncheck that option and the packages will be linked into your exe at compileTime. (Your exe will g-r-o-w in size.) The idea behind the "build with runtime packages" is to keep the size of exe's down and allow several apps to share common bpl's because they are NOT linked into the exe # compileTime - that's the upside. The downside you are now experiencing - you must distribute your bpl's with your exe.
I am trying to start making my own libraries avaialble as packages prior to compiling my Apps with these packages hence modularising my code. For years I've 'sort of' understood packages, breathing a sigh of relief when I load a component package and click on 'Install' and it does. I understand that the process of installing a component (or components) is via the creation of a BPL which is then registered with the IDE.
Where I begin to get lost is how to make files available so that I can compile with EITHER a package OR pre-compiled dcu's (like the third party vendors do) and without pointing my project at the source code all the time. I can create a package with the following settings:
where I've specified that all my output will go into 'c:\scratch\wow'. After a build I find TEST.BPL, TEST.DCP and lots of DUC's. Now, when I point another project at this folder to use the DCU's, I get a missing DFM error (one of the units is a form). Should I be manually copying needed DFM's into this output folder? The DPK knows about this form, so why do I not get the DFM copied for me? I presume that using TEST.BPL, that file contains everything, but I wish to work in the two modes. Of course I can get around this by including the source folder in my project search path to find the DFM but third party libraries seem to already have the DFM's in their output folder. Did they install them there using the installer?
Thanks
instead
As others say you could use post-build events to copy your DFM files into place. Other people use a one-time external batch file that copies the DFMs to the DCU folder.
Personally I see very little benefit to making packages for things which are not developed also as reusable components. I also see very little benefit in partitioning an existing application into packages, when you don't reasonably need to use the same subsection or package more than once, or at designtime.
Things I would put into packages:
Delphi visual and non-visual components.
Things which absolutely must be plugged in at runtime, or left out. For example, supposing I sell MetaWare Light and MetaWare Pro, and instead of using compiler IFDEFs to build a differnt binary, I preferred for some reason to simply not ship the ADVANCEDFEATURE.BPL with my systems.
Things to beware of with packages:
I have run into a lot of compiler bugs when combining packages with generics. I have also run into IDE crashes and lockups, in Delphi 2009, 2010, XE and XE2. (I believe XE3 is better)
You should learn a bit about BorlandMM.dll and shared memory management in the BPL world before you move to it. There are some subtleties.
Packages limits the ability of the linker to decide what to remove. In fact, it pretty much destroys it. Packages contain everything that is linked into them, and nothing publically accessible can be removed.
Once you've created a binary package and shipped it to even one customer, you have a pretty difficult to modify contract (this BPL contains a particular signature or application binary interface) you have to be careful in the future to never change them, or mix and match them. Beware of DLL hell, even among your own customers, and be prepared to use versioning on your packages. Just as delphi packages have a version suffix, I recommend you use version suffixes in your own packages right off the bat, and bump them whenever binary compatibility has changed.
Delphi handles build dependencies between packages about as well as could be hoped, which is less well than a single monolithic application. In applications that I have that make heavy use of packages, I find project groups that contain a bunch of packages that depend on each other are very difficult to manage and build quickly. In fact, I have experienced that both compiles and builds are slower and more frustrating than they would be in a singular 750Kline megaproject.
I really wonder if you're not that into the package area of Delphi (you breath a sigh of relief whenever a delphi component actually builds and installs without issue?) if you really want to move into the Packages World totally. By all means, you should experiment. But I wouldn't bet the farm on it yet. Learn some more first.
Yes, you should copy the .dfm to the directory with the compiled units (.dcus), if that is the only directory you want in your search path. The BPL will of course contain the .dfms, and you need a .dcp to be able to link a BPL with your app.
Third party tools must have put the .dfms together with the .dcus in the directory using their installer, indeed.
Instead of copying *.DFM manually you can use Post-Build Event (Project/Options/Build Event), ex:
copy “$(PROJECTDIR)\Unit1.DFM” “c:\Scratch\wow\Unit1.DFM”
I found a way to do this without moving .dfm files to the directory of .dcu files, so you can have a directory for .dcu files only one for .dcp files only and another for .bpl files only.
All you need to do is to create another directory on your good structure, as I do. The directory is called RES and in it should be placed all the resource files (.res files, not .dcr files) that are used by applications compiled using your packages (components). In the Delphi Library Path, you must include in addition to the DCU directory (you should already have) a directory named RES.
On your component (design time) do everything you want with the form (design it, put other components, etc). In the source code of the unit you replace {$R *.dfm} with {$R UnitName.dfm}. In doing so, save all and close the DPK. Now move the .dfm file (do not copy, move!) to the RES folder (the .dfm file is a resource file to the Delphi. The {$R} directive is proof!) and after that open the DPK again to understand what has changed.
First realize that you may not open the form (F12) from his unit, though no error was issued by Delphi about "DFM missing".
Now, do a Build on your package and then install it. Realized again? No errors displayed! This happened because you have indicated the location of .dfm file in the Delphi library search path (RES directory).
Done! You can use your component and dfm will be found when your component is included in an application.
Many of you can now say that this way I will not longer be able to visually edit a form in the component design time. Yes this is true, but if you think about it, why would I want to change so often a form into a component that, in practice, should only be used and slightly edited? Draw your own conclusions ;)
I'm compiling my application with Delphi 2010. My problem (it may not be a problem for anybody else) is that when you open that EXE with any resource editor you can see RCDATA which holds forms data. I don't like an idea of my program being "exposed" so I want to ask you is there any trick to remove that information from EXE or encrypt it that nobody (at least from resource editor) can see it?
You may create your forms fully via source.
opposite: you can't use the form designer.
with gexperts you can convert existing forms to source.
encrypting and compressing is not a solution. when the app can load the resources a engineer can it do, too.
I have written a DFM compressor that works inside of the Delphi IDE to compress DFMs at compile time. It then decompresses them on the fly at runtime.
I sell it for $15 US and it comes with src.
It currently works with D7, D2006, D2007 and D2009. I don't own D2010 but I have recently gotten XE and I will be upgrading it and making it available for XE as well in the near future. If someone makes a request for XE, or even D2010 compatibility, I'll work to make that happen sooner.
It's called the DeForM System and can be found here.
I use it for a number of my personal projects.
You would need to modify VCL source code to teach form loader to take resources elsewhere. Also, compilation would require post-build step or stripping resources from the compiled EXE and moving them to a separate encrypted file (for example). All of this is manual work, I never heard of any automation for described tasks.
One thing you could do IF your forms are finalized (i.e. they won't be modified further) is take GExperts and use their Component To Code expert to create forms and their contents in runtime. But modification of such forms will require changes in code.
It actually just holds published property of the components you drop on your forms and the form itself (actually the content of DFM file for each form), not any source code. So even if somebody extracts that data, they can at most produce a form visually looking the same as your form, but none of the codes you wrote for the form.
One way to hide such data from resource editors is to build all the components you use in your form at runtime, not using the form designer. This way, the DFM resource will not contain their data. As far as I remember, there are tools which are able to receive a DFM file as input, and generate runtime code for component creations automatically (e.g. GExpert), so that you could copy\paste the code in your form's OnCreate event-handler.
Another option is to use an EXE compressor. A compressor will compress your EXE file so the content of the file will be changed and not usable until being decompressed. Tools like UPX can compress your EXE file and decompress it on the fly when you execute the EXE. Take note that using known compressors like UPX has the drawback that many cracking tools or crackers can detect them and automatically decompress the EXE before processing it. So if you need more security, you'd better go for custom compressors.
I haven't used it, but Citadel for Delphi does automatic compression and encryption of DFM resources in your EXE. It doesn't look like they've updated past Delphi 2009 yet, but it's exactly what you're looking for.
I try to increase performance of Delphi 2007 and Codeinsight.
In the application there are 483 files added in the DPR file.
I don't know if it is imagination but I feel that I got better performance from Codeinsight by simply readd all files in the DPR.
I also think (correct me if I'm wrong) that all files that are included in a uses section also should be included in the DPR file for best performance.
My question is, does it exists a tool that scan the whole project and give a list what files are missing in the DPR file and what files can be removed? Would also be nice to have a list of uses that can be removed in the PAS files.
I found Pascal Analyzer that seems to be a good tool. Comments about this specially in this case is appreciated.
A related question is here.
Regards
Regarding the unused units: cnWizards contains a uses cleaner which works very well
From the same editor as Pascal Analyser, ICARUS is free and do this job in the simplest way.
http://www.peganza.com/#ICARUS