Loading GLSL shader without using any Apple APIs - ios

What is a good way to load a GLSL shader using C/C++ without using Objective-C or any Apple APIs?
I am currently using the following method, which is from the iPhone 3D Programming book, but it says that it is not recommended for production code:
Simple.vsh
const char* SimpleVertexShader = STRINGIFY
(
// Shader code...
);
RenderingEngine.cpp
#define STRINGIFY(A) #A
#include "Simple.vsh"
// ...
glShaderSource( shaderHandle, 1, &SimpleVertexShader, 0 );

If you want to load your shaders from files in your app bundle, you can get the file paths using the NSBundle object (in Objective-C), or using the CoreFoundation CFBundle object (in pure C).
Either way, you are using Apple-specific APIs. The only thing you're getting by using CFBundle instead of NSBundle is more boilerplate code.
If you don't want to use any Apple APIs, then your options are to embed your shaders as literal strings, or connect to a server on the Internet and download them (using the Unix socket API).
What you really need to do is define an interface by which your RenderingEngine gets the source code for its shaders, and implement that interface using the appropriate platform-specific API on each platform to which your port the RenderingEngine. The interface can be something super simple like this:
RenderingEngineShaderSourceInterface.h
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" {
#endif
// You are responsible for freeing the C string that this function returns.
extern char const *RenderingEngine_shaderSourceForName(char const *name);
#ifdef __cplusplus
}
#endif
Then you create RenderingEngineShaderSource_Windows.cpp, RenderingEngineShaderSource_iOS.m, RenderingEngineShaderSource_Linux.cpp, etc. Each one implements RenderingEngine_shaderSourceForName using the appropriate API for that platform.

I use one of two methods. If it's a short shader, I may just put it code:
const char shader[] =
"uniform vec4 blah;\n" // Note, no semicolon here - it does the right thing
"main ()\n"
"{\n"
...rest of code
"}\n";
Or, if it's longer or going to be re-used in other places, I'll put it into a text file in the resources and read the text file at run time. You can get to it via [NSBundle pathForResource:ofType:].

Consider a C++ raw string literal; no STRINGIFY is needed since the newer features of C++ allow you to do similar things without macro.
I'd retype a good example but here is one.

Related

Getting the address of a section with Clang on OSX/iOS

For quite a while I've been using linker sections for registering elements that are used at runtime. I find that it's a simple way to make generic and extensible interface. A particularly useful use-case is something like unit tests or a multitool (e.g. busybox) so one can do something like:
$ ./tool <handler>
Where handler is a simple string that is "looked up" at runtime by walking the linker section. In this way, your parser doesn't have to "know" what commands are supported. It just finds their handlers in the linker section dedicated for them or it doesn't.
With GCC I've been doing something like (you can do this with Clang as well):
#define __tool __attribute__((__section__("tools")))
Then each handler I want to register gets a simple structure (with more or less information as needed)
struct tool {
const char *name;
const char *help;
int (*handler)(int argc, char **argv);
}
Then, for each tool you just do something like (often conveniently wrapped in a macro):
int example_tool0(int argc, char **argv)
{
return -1;
}
static const struct tool example_tool0 = {
.name = "exmaple_tool0",
.help = "usage: ...",
.handler = example_tool0
};
__tool static const struct tool *ptr = &example_tool0;
And used a such:
$ ./tool example_tool0
And because of __tool, each pointer registered in this way is packed into a linker section that can be walked.
Now, on GCC the linker creates two magic variables for each section: __start_SECTION and __stop_SECTION. So, to "walk" all of our registered handlers you just take the size of this section, divide by the size of a pointer, and then strncmp against the name (in this example) in the struct.
All of the above just to say, how can this be done using the OSX/iOS Clang-based toolchain? I would rather not use a custom linker script to achieve this seemingly simple operation.
Is there a way do this on OSX? I have worked around the issue by registering an empty entry at the beginning of the section and at the end. But doing so requires forcing the link order of the object files.
While OSX/iOS uses Clang as their platform compiler, they do not use the LLVM linker. Rather, they implement their own ld64 (which is open source) for whatever reason. So, it may just not be supported. I didn't readily see anything in man ld on OSX, but it's a bit info-dense.
For reference with ELF and GCC
And so this has been answered by others already. I did search, but I must have missed this answer. I've actually looked for an answer to this question many times before but must've never used the right words.
https://stackoverflow.com/a/22366882/2446071
In summary, apparently the linker supports syntax to define these desired symbols yourself:
extern char __start_SECTION __asm("section$start$SEGMENT$SECTION");
extern char __stop_SECTION __asm("section$end$SEGMENT$SECTION");

Can iOS Objective-C app use nested static ObjC/Swift libs?

OBJ-C ONLY...
That is,
An ObjC app imports ObjC static lib A.
Static lib A imports static lib B.
Static lib A has functions that call functions within lib B.
The app only calls functions in lib A and does not call functions in lib B.
Can I assume that lib A or B can be either Obj-C or Swift?
IE. Can an ObjC app import an ObjC-or-Swift static lib A that itself imports a second ObjC-or-Swift static lib B? (yes, 4 use case permutations)
the git repository https://github.com/CombineCppSwiftObjcInStaticLib i created for you is showing this..
your initial #objc func run_central() in BLE_central.swift is exposed, which triggers the precompiler to generate objc compatible headers (bridge) which then again makes it possible to call the function from a method inside .mm(objc++) or .m(objc) when this generated header is imported.
In fact Hub_lib inside the repo is a static ObjC++ lib mixed with Swift. It would work the other way around also. The headers are the key for success here. If you can provide some objc or c or c++ header to swift functions it becomes compatible and wise versa. I mean in general, thats the idea of headers. If you don't have headers, that does not mean you can not call some external stuff, it just means you would call it blind. A proper IDE will complain before you even try to do this evil stuff, unknown entry points aka unknown symbols etc.. So you go for a proper header - always.
To properly combine swift with other languages its good to know there are always two ways of bridging.
In case of Objective-C (and also Objective-C++) it is
Bridging into Swift (projectname-Bridging-Header.h),
and Bridging out of Swift (expose with #objc to trigger automatically internal generation of projectname-Swift.h file. So this header is "invisible" in the file browser on the left side. Nor will you find it in the repo as file, it is named by modulename which is the project-name). The last mentioned header you could even write manually yourself, with lots of troublesome back-draws.
Hint: Executable code is executable code. No matter what language, as far it is compiled for the right device architecture and has symbols to call and you know what to do with the data returned.
Another Hint: there is a way to handle C pointers in swift see docu which become swift datatypes which you can use to go the other way and declare functions to return those from swift.
And direct use of C in Swift is also possible. The compiler considers if you explicit mark some code as C. extern "C" { /* code */ } will cause the C++ compiler to remember, this is still C++ code to compile the function in such a way, it can be called from C (and Swift)
//Example.hpp //no target membership
#ifdef __cplusplus
#include <stdio.h>
class Example {
private:
const char * _name;
public:
Example(const char *name);
~Example(void);
int getLen(void);
};
#endif
There should be an Example.cpp and don't forget to tell Xcode you deal with c++ #ifdef __cplusplus + #endif
//Example.cpp //has target membership
#include "Example.hpp"
#ifdef __cplusplus
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string>
//code implementation according to example.hpp
Example::Example(const char *name) {
_name = name;
}
int Example::getLen() {
return (int)strlen(_name);
}
#endif
//ExampleWrapper.cpp //has target membership
#include "Example.hpp" //c++ header file
extern "C" int myCppFunction(const char *s)
{
// Create an instance of Example, defined in the library
// and call getLen() on it, return result.
return Example(s).getLen();
}
So this function needs to be declared in the bridging header to make use of it.
//
// Use this file to import your target's public headers that you would like to expose to Swift.
//
// for extern "C" functions declare them one by one here
// as implemented in ExampleWrapper.cpp
// becomes "func myCppFunction(_ s: UnsafePointer<Int8>!) -> Int32" in swift
int myCppFunction(const char * s);
and then call from swift..
os_log("The result from C++ is %u", myCppFunction("12345"))
So in fact, yes. Integrating a static lib A that calls static lib B in App is possible. Happy compiling as long you offer some header for each part that needs to know what is inside the head of the other lib. That is true for Apps as it is true for libs and frameworks under each other.
Edit here some important stuff to read about Swift Package Manager C support https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0038-swiftpm-c-language-targets.md
As long as the libraries export Objective-C compatible symbols, it doesn't matter if they're written in Objective-C, or Swift, or C++, or any other compiled language.
And we know that the Swift compiler exports Objective-C compatible symbols for all declarations that are marked with #objc (either explicitly or implicitly).
From a consumer perspective it doesn't matter which language generated the libraries, as long as the Objective-C compiler/linker can consume the symbols exported by those libraries.

Metal shader types vertex and buffer best practice demonstrated in "ShaderTypes.h"

Here is the full shadertypes.h file. I am going to break it down into parts that I cant understand.
#ifndef ShaderTypes_h
#define ShaderTypes_h
//Part 1 Compiler flags
#ifdef __METAL_VERSION__
#define NS_ENUM(_type, _name) enum _name : _type _name; enum _name : _type
#define NSInteger metal::int32_t
#else
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#endif
#include <simd/simd.h>
//Part 2 buffer index
typedef NS_ENUM(NSInteger, BufferIndex)
{
BufferIndexMeshPositions = 0,
BufferIndexMeshGenerics = 1,
BufferIndexUniforms = 2
};
//Part 3 vertex attribute and position
typedef NS_ENUM(NSInteger, VertexAttribute)
{
VertexAttributePosition = 0,
VertexAttributeTexcoord = 1,
};
//Part 4 texture index color
typedef NS_ENUM(NSInteger, TextureIndex)
{
TextureIndexColor = 0,
};
//Part 5 uniforms
typedef struct
{
matrix_float4x4 projectionMatrix;
matrix_float4x4 modelViewMatrix;
} Uniforms;
#endif /* ShaderTypes_h */
Part 1
#ifdef __METAL_VERSION__
#define NS_ENUM(_type, _name) enum _name : _type _name; enum _name : _type
#define NSInteger metal::int32_t
#else
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#endif
//A bunch of definitions go after this
#endif
My confusion is mostly why we are doing all of this code. It seems to be checking if the user has metal but then what is this NS_ENUM it is defining? Why is it defining a metal variable? While is foundation conditionally imported?
Part 2
typedef NS_ENUM(NSInteger, BufferIndex)
{
BufferIndexMeshPositions = 0,
BufferIndexMeshGenerics = 1,
BufferIndexUniforms = 2
};
Not exactly sure what this is doing especially since I cant find anyone referencing them explicitly anywhere.
Part 3
typedef NS_ENUM(NSInteger, VertexAttribute)
{
VertexAttributePosition = 0,
VertexAttributeTexcoord = 1,
};
This one has a bit more of a clear usage because it is referenced in the .metal file
typedef struct
{
float3 position [[attribute(VertexAttributePosition)]];
float2 texCoord [[attribute(VertexAttributeTexcoord)]];
} Vertex;
as well as in the attribute section of the vertex descriptor code
mtlVertexDescriptor.attributes[VertexAttribute.position.rawValue].format = MTLVertexFormat.float3
mtlVertexDescriptor.attributes[VertexAttribute.position.rawValue].offset = 0
mtlVertexDescriptor.attributes[VertexAttribute.position.rawValue].bufferIndex = BufferIndex.meshPositions.rawValue
...
Somehow it appears to be keeping track of indexes of the various elements rather like the buffer.
Part 4
This one I sort of get as it is referenced in the render here
renderEncoder.setFragmentTexture(colorMap, index: TextureIndex.color.rawValue)
as well as the shader here
fragment float4 fragmentShader(..., texture2d<half> colorMap [[ texture(TextureIndexColor) ]]){
I sort of get this one (Minus the NSEnum part) however I dont get how it is good practice to do this for just one thing.
Part 5
This one is actually the only one I understand it looks like its a struct for all the uniform components which makes a lot of sense as it is storing the actual types of the uniforms allowing the shader to be exposed to the struct as well as the renderer.
I guess ultimately I am wondering why this approach was taken and why it is a suggested best practice by Apple. I suppose it sort of makes sense to do things this way except for the fact that metal appears to play better with objective-c even though it looks like swift.
This is a header that's meant to be shared by Metal shader code and app code (either Objective-C or, via bridging, Swift). Having to share it between those two languages requires a bit of care.
The #ifdef __METAL_VERSION__ test determines which language it's being compiled in. For Metal, a couple of macros are defined. For Objective-C, it imports Foundation. (Foundation can't, of course, be imported when compiling Metal code.)
In their (Objective-)C headers, Apple routinely declare enums using the NS_ENUM() macro. That macro is defined within the Foundation headers, so it can be used when this header is being compiled into app code. It's not defined in the Metal headers, so this header needs to define it for itself if it wants to use it (as it does). The Foundation version of the macro is useful because it detects compiler capabilities to use typed enums if available and conventional enums if not. In this header, Apple is implementing that same macro for the Metal shader language. Since there's no question whether the compiler supports typed enums (it does), there's only one definition of the macro which takes advantage of that feature.
Later in the header, they plan on using the NSInteger type. That's defined by the Foundation headers for app code. Since they want to use the same code for Metal but that type isn't defined there, they need to define it in this header. They make a couple of weird choices, though. First, they use a macro instead of a typedef. Second, they define it to be equivalent to int32_t (in the metal namespace). That's weird because the app code is going to be 64-bit (Metal isn't available to 32-bit apps) causing NSInteger to be a 64-bit integer type (equivalent to int64_t). So, the two worlds are going to disagree about the size of NSInteger and therefore all of the enums based on it. That's kind of bad, but probably doesn't cause a real issue given the ways these enums are actually used.
It would probably have been better to simply base the enums on int, which is 32-bit in all Apple environments.
Parts 2, 3, and 4 are all similar. It's generally good practice to use "symbolic" constants rather than just magic numbers (i.e. integer literals within the code). It is less error-prone and improves readability. These parts are simply defining some such symbolic constants for use by the Metal code and app code to share. The fact that some of these names aren't used in the particular sample project you're examining suggests that Apple uses this same header for multiple sample projects, or something like that.

How to hide the constants I defined in static library?

I have a library of my own. And there are lots of constants defined in headers (for example animation duration). But, all my headers are visible and changeable. How can I prevent others to change my default values?
There are some const value in headers of Apple libraries like this:
CA_EXTERN NSString * const kCATransitionMoveIn
__OSX_AVAILABLE_STARTING (__MAC_10_5, __IPHONE_2_0);
Objective-C is still, well, C. Maybe older systems had issues, which is why you see the macros there. Anyway, you should still be safe with any built-in type.
If you declare something as "extern" the compiler will treat it something like, "OK, I see that someone has declared and external thingy. I don't have to know what it is, because some external unit will define it. The linker will handle the rest.
That paragraph will get me in trouble with the C-police, but it's close enough for a practical explanation. Thus, you can do this in your header file...
extern int const TheAnswerToLifeTheUniverseAndEverything;
And then, in one of your implementation files (outside of the #implementation/#end section)...
int const TheAnswerToLifeTheUniverseAndEverything = 42;
Note, in "modern" Xcode versions, you can do the same thing with objects. Note the "const" which means we have a constant-pointer-to-NSString.
// In header
extern NSString * const TheAnswerToLifeTheUniverseAndEverythingString;
// In source
NSString * const TheAnswerToLifeTheUniverseAndEverythingString = #"42";

Code coverage with Xcode 4.2 - Missing files

I followed Claus's post to set up code coverage on Xcode 4.2 with LLVM 3.0. I'm able to see test coverage files, but they're only for my unit test classes, not my actual project classes. I've tried setting Generate Test Coverage Files and Instrument Program Flow to Yes on my main target, but that didn't help, as it failed with the following error:
fopen$UNIX2003 called from function llvm_gcda_start_file
To clarify, I don't think that's even the right approach - I just tried it to see if it would generate code coverage on my project classes.
At this point, I'd be happy to try anything that gets code coverage working on my app. Any suggestions?
You are expecting linker problem, profile_rt library uses fopen$UNIX2003 and fwrite$UNIX2003 functions instead of fopen and fwrite.
All you need is to add the following .c file to your project:
#include <stdio.h>
FILE *fopen$UNIX2003( const char *filename, const char *mode )
{
return fopen(filename, mode);
}
size_t fwrite$UNIX2003( const void *a, size_t b, size_t c, FILE *d )
{
return fwrite(a, b, c, d);
}
This code just remaps the missing functions to standard ones.
Note on $UNIX2003 suffix:
I've found an Apple document saying:
The UNIX™ conformance variants use the $UNIX2003 suffix.
Important: The work for UNIX™ conformance started in Mac OS 10.4, but was not completed until 10.5. Thus, in the 10.4 versions of libSystem.dylib, many of the conforming variant symbols (with the $UNIX2003 suffix) exist. The list is not complete, and the conforming behavior of the variant symbols may not be complete, so they should be avoided.
Because the 64-bit environment has no legacy to maintain, it was created to be UNIX™ conforming from the start, without the use of the $UNIX2003 suffix. So, for example, _fputs$UNIX2003 in 32-bit and _fputs in 64-bit will have the same conforming behavior.
So I expect libprofile_rt to be linked against 10.4 SDK.
I use CoverStory http://code.google.com/p/coverstory/ a GUI for .gcda and .gcno files.
The documentation explains the settings needed to generate these files http://code.google.com/p/coverstory/wiki/UsingCoverstory.

Resources