I'm having trouble understanding why the Newtonsoft JSON parser has to be device specific under Xamarin. I cannot seem to find any way to have the parser exist in a common, shared library. I'm using the Tasky Pro sample app. I can get the JSON.Net DLLs from the Xamarin store to work in the Android and iOS projects, however that makes no architecural sense. E.g., the SQLite stuff is all in a shared lib, as you'd expect - as one set of c# source files.
Ideally I'd like to just add some kind of reference to "Tasky.Core" and be able to serialize/deserialize JSON.
Is there any way to get JSON.Net to work in a shared library (across droid/ios/wp8)? The source is pretty huge to try to manage as linked files, if that's even possible...
If not, is there some alternative way of managing JSON that will work in this way?
You should be able to use the JSon.NET NuGet Package for this. The implementation is actually platform-specific [1], but NuGet will transparently take care of that for you and pick the correct one for you.
Note that you need Mono 3.2.6 and Xamarin.iOS 7.0.6 for this, which just hit the alpha channel this week, I have just fixed some critical bugs in this area. You should also upgrade the NuGet Add-In in Xamarin Studio to the latest version (0.8), which contains several PCL-related bug fixes.
Simply add the NuGet Add-In to Xamarin Studio if you have not done so already, then search for "JSon.NET", the add-in will automatically install the package and add the required library references for you.
[1] The NuGet package contains different .dll's for different target frameworks and then picks and references the best one for your project - so your application will only contain a single implementation, but an iOS app may use a different one than a desktop application.
Update 01/14/14:
NuGet packages usually contain different implementations - unfortunately, not all of them will work with Xamarin.iOS due to APIs such as Reflection.Emit or Full DLR that are not available on iOS.
If you look into the packages/Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8/lib/ directory, you'll see different sub-directories - each of these contain a different implementation and NuGet will use the one that best fits the current target framework. Unfortunately, NuGet does not always pick the right one :-(
For Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8, the "portable-net45+wp80+win8" implementation uses DLR features that are not available on iOS, the "portable-net40+sl4+wp7+win8" one is ok. So if you add the NuGet package to a PCL that's targeting for instance Profile136, you'll get the correct implementation.
There is no GUI to choose another implementation, but you can edit the .csproj file. Replace
<Reference Include="Newtonsoft.Json">
<HintPath>..\packages\Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8\lib\portable-net45+wp80+win8\Newtonsoft.Json.dll</HintPath>
</Reference>
with
<Reference Include="Newtonsoft.Json">
<HintPath>..\packages\Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8\lib\portable-net40+sl4+wp7+win8\Newtonsoft.Json.dll</HintPath>
</Reference>
and it should work.
In general, when you're getting an error message about missing types after adding a new NuGet package, go to the corresponding package directory and grep -r for that symbol - chances are that there's a different implementation which does not use this type.
Hopefully, a more elegant solution will be available in the future, but that needs coordination with the NuGet team and package authors, so it'll take some time.
Just add it to Shared Library via NuGet. Actually, all your request/response tasks should be done in library. You should use JSON.Net to parse response.
Related
I installed the GtkSharp 3.22.24.36 package via Project > Add NuGet Packages..., which completed successfully. But now Monodevelop can't decide which version of GtkSharp to use (3.22.24.36 or the in-built one, 2.12).
If I uncheck gtk-sharp in the Edit references... dialog, it tells me that I can't use the UI designer without it.
How do I get Monodevelop to use the downloaded GtkSharp (3.22)?
MonoDevelop comes with a custom version of Gtk2 + Xwt bundled. If you plan to use Gtk3, then the designer must be deactivated, since it won't work with Gtk3.
My advice, anyway, no matter which toolkit you use, is to avoid using the designer. As soon as you involve the designer, you code heavily depends on the IDE you use (Visual Studio, MonoDevelop, NetBeans... you name it).
Creating user interfaces "by hand" is no longer traumatic as it was in the 90's with the Windows API. For example, you can find a very good Gtk# tutorial in ZetCode.
User Interface Toolkits are actually very similar, they change the name of widgets and sometimes provide a slightly different layout, but they are all mostly the same, no matter it is WinForms or Gtk(for C#), Swing (Java), or Qt (C++ and others).
I know its an older question but things changed. Abandon MonoDevelop, just use the .NET Standard bound implementation of GtkSharp. You can then literally design interface using glade xml files, using official Glade application from GTK+. You can find it here.
With the current push from MS to abandon Framework in favor of Core, we finally succumbed when we figured out they will kill Framework (which they just did with .NET 5 announcement), but we also used the opportunity to investigate other options for our ports of LoBs to core. We discovered GtkSharp as WinForms replacement and AvaloniaUI as WPF replacement, which not only work perfectly but also truly work cross-platform. We ported several applications already and actually moved more then half of business work stations from Windows to Linux.
I want to modularize a monolithic application by using Java modules (introduced by Project Jigsaw).
Unfortunately I'm currently stuck to use Java 8. I would like to build those modules (jar files) anyway, but without the feature of using a module-info.java file for declaring the dependencies and the exported API.
Some weeks ago I stumbled upon an API/framework which allows to define nearly the same things that you can do in a module-info.java file. It could be used in JUnit tests in order to enforce module's not to use the internal's of another module and that module's only can access modules they explicitly depend on.
Of course you do not have any assistence from the compiler or the IDE, but you can enforce the access by JUnit. Unfortunately I do not find the project which provides the API any more.
Can anyone help?
Btw. if there is another good approach beside a unit test, please let me know, too!
https://www.archunit.org/ is what I have been looking for.
I'm trying to create a cross platform application using MVVMCross and portable class libraries, which interacts with an api and displays some data asynchronously.
Currently I am trying to generate a SHA512 hash value for a sign key that will be sent along to the api.
I am not exactly sure how I can implement the cryptology portion. I have tried using the SHA512 class, however it appears to be unavailable. I tried manually adding a reference to System.Security.Cryptology which didn't help.
I also tried additional packages on nuget such as SharpCrypt to see if they would help generate a hash value, however I see the error "the type or namespace name 'CryptSharp' could not be found" after adding the package from nuget.
I am targeting:
.Net Framework 4.5+
Windows Store apps
Silver light 5
Windows Phone 8
I'm quite a beginner so maybe I am missing something extremely obvious, any help or examples would be much appreciated.
Thanks!
I believe some of the crypto classes may also be available portably using the PCLContrib project - http://pclcontrib.codeplex.com - but I don't think this is yet available beyond Windows.
Where functionality isn't available portably, you can inject implementations into portable class libraries via an interface from each UI platform:
there's an example of this in the first part of N=31 in http://mvvmcross.blogspot.co.uk
there's a full introduction to MvvmCross dependency injection in https://github.com/MvvmCross/MvvmCross/wiki/Service-Location-and-Inversion-of-Control
I'm writing a plugin but I need a specific implementation for each Windows Phone version.
The problem is that the plugin system will try to load the platform plugin assembly based on a convention. In this case, "WindowsPhone".
We may try to override CreatePluginManager but then it will affect the rest of the plugins you may need.
I'm thinking of generating two different projects with different names but the same assembly and namespace. This, I think, would solve the problem of loading the specific plugin but I don't really know how to face an eventual publication to Nuget.
Best regards,
Roberto.
Generating assemblies with the same name is a viable way to go - it is something that the Microsoft Pcl teams do quite frequently - it is how the reference assemblies work.
The nuget distribution of these shouldn't be an issue - but would be a "faff" - as the nuget zip file would use different folders for the different files. There might, however, be some work to do at the .targets level if you want a single project to build both wp7 and wp8 configurations (this is similar to the effort needed for x86/x64/arm variants of assemblies in winrt nuget packages).
In fact, the main reason I can think for not using the same name is the very simple reason that it's far too easy to get in a muddle that way.
If for this one plugin, you wanted to override the plugin manager during setup, you could provide custom loading functionality based on
inheriting from https://github.com/slodge/MvvmCross/blob/v3/CrossCore/Cirrious.CrossCore/Plugins/MvxFilePluginManager.cs
and then overriding protected virtual string GetPluginAssemblyNameFrom(Type toLoad) to add a special based on some property of toLoad - eg if (toLoad.Name.EndsWith("Foo")) toReturn += PlatformPostfix
If this pattern becomes common - whether for wp or for the other versioned platforms - then we could include something back into the framework - it would be easy enough to try a version-neutral load followed by a version-specific load for every plugin.
There are also other ways you could go about this too...
E.g. Another possibility/opportunity is that your plugin core file could try loading multiple platform adaptions itself - eg using code like
public void EnsureLoaded()
{
var manager = Mvx.Resolve<IMvxPluginManager>();
manager.TryEnsurePlatformAdaptionLoaded<PluginLoader>();
manager.TryEnsurePlatformAdaptionLoaded<Sub1.PluginLoader>();
manager.TryEnsurePlatformAdaptionLoaded<Sub2.PluginLoader>();
}
This would try loading three child assemblies for that plugin - MyPlugin.WindowsPhone, MyPlugin.Sub1.WindowsPhone and MyPlugin.Sub2.WindowsPhone although you would only package one of these on each platform.
I am trying to strongly name a 3rd party API that I have the code for but it's using a 3rd party DLL/NuGet Package that is also not strongly named and I'm having a lot of trouble.
I'm using the Box Windows SDK and the API was written in the .NET portable subset and supports .NET for Windows Store Apps, .NET Framework 4 and higher, SL4 and higher, and Windows Phone 7 and higher. Granted, I do not need all of these but I do need the .NET 4 and Silverlight versions. The API already works wonderfully and runs fine on its own. It would with my application also, if all my projects were unsigned but they aren't. We use strongly named assemblies for our Silverlight application in order to make use of application library caching.
Anyway, I have the source code for the API so I simply added my PFX file to the project to sign it. I then get an error that a dependency that this API is using called NitoAsnycEx.dll is not signed. I do not have the code for Nito.AsyncEx.dll but normally this isn't such a problem, more of an annoyance. So now I have an age-old problem of needing to take a 3rd party DLL of which I don't have code for and sign it with my PFX or another SNK file.
I can do either and normally I use one of the processes so wonderfully explained in this post by Ian Picknell: http://ianpicknell.blogspot.com/2009/12/adding-strong-name-to-third-party.html. So I have followed that process and the IL signing tools seem to sign the DLL just fine.
To make a long story shorter, let's use the simplest version of the signing process where I already have a simple SNK file ready to go. Basically, I do this:
I can run ILDASM to get the .il file for this 3rd party EXE:
ILDASM Nito.AsyncEx.dll /out:Nito.AsyncEx.il
I can then run ILASM to get the signed DLL:
ILASM Nito.AsyncEx.il /dll /resource=Nito.AsyncEx.res /key=NPSAssemblyKeyNoPassword.snk
It works great and I get this result:
Method Implementations (total): 118
Resolving local member refs: 0 -> 0 defs, 0 refs, 0 unresolved
Writing PE file
Signing file with strong name
Operation completed successfully
So now I have a signed DLL. I go back to my 3rd Party API code and remove the old reference to NitoAsyncEx.dll and put a new one to this. I try to compile and then I get an error like this:
Error 44 The base class or interface 'System.Object' in assembly 'System.Runtime, Version=1.5.11.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a' referenced by type 'Nito.AsyncEx.AsyncLock' could not be resolved r:\Data\GM\Source\GrantManagement\GrantManagement\3rd Party\Nito\Nito.AsyncEx.dll
I figure there is some problems using the portable .net library here but I'm not sure what it is. This same process normally works for me for Silverlight 4+ and Full .NET 4.5 framework libraries. Is there another ILASM or ILDASM set somewhere that will disassemble and reassemble the portable code correctly? Is this even possible?
I also tried to go and get the source code for the NitoAsyncEx.dll, which is open source btw, and compile it but that source code will not compile as it's missing some files. So currently I'm stuck with my integration of this API into my project and need a little assistance from any experts in the community.
Is there a way to sign this DLL correctly so we're not missing references to basic classes such as System.Object?
Is there a way to get around needing to sign this DLL at all and having it referenced from my projects?
UPDATED
The Box SDK has been updated and is now strong-named on nuget. This is thanks to the recent update to AsyncEx which strong-named the assembly.
As you mentioned, it's unfortunately out of our control that the NitoAsyncEx library is not strongly named. This library provides the ability to properly lock resources during an async/await call, and I do not believe there is a better alternative at the moment.
This being said, I may have a (hopefully temporary) workaround for you. I've downloaded the source from https://nitoasyncex.codeplex.com/ and was able to get it to compile. These are the steps I performed:
Removed the reference to MSBuild in the csproj
Copied the missing Dequeue.cs file from the packages folder
Resolved missing nuget references
Regenerated the AssemblyInfo.cs
Excluded the .tt template files from the project
Unloaded all other projects the SDK does not use
Here's the resulting solution:
https://cloud.box.com/s/7ikurtyajqmhq9p8q52x
I've successfully ran the resulting dll through the SDK's tests so hopefully this should cover what you need. I cannot guarantee the stability of this method, but having a working source should allow you to do any signing you need. From there, you should be able to drop the signed assembly into the SDK source and sign that assembly as well.