Skip to main content

Android meets .NET !!!

It is always fun for me to program in C# (besides C++). If so, how would I feel if I was able to program for Android in C#? You may be wondering what in the world I am talking about. Android development environment is all Java and open source stuff. How could this Microsoft thing fit onto it?

Well, it seems that some clever guys had huddled up and ported Mono for Android, developed .NET libraries for the Android SDK, and also supplemented it with a 'Mono for Android' project template in Visual Studio; and called it mono for android. Thus we end up writing C# code happily for Android.

After a bunch of installations, fire up your Visual Studio (2010) and you should be seeing a new project template 'Mono for Android' under C#.


Create a new 'Mono for Android' project, which by default comes with an activity - C# code.

Modified the orginal code to try starting a new activity from the default one...

The project layout for most of the part is similar to the native Android project. The layout resources files are named *.axml, and the strings.xml is really clean with named string constants with the ugly behind the scenes of ids and stuff in the Resource.designer.cs. The way to code is straight forward and needs no special explanation. A good to see thing for me was .NET coding style.

A similar set of addins and plugins have been developed for MonoDevelop too; although I did not try that.

It is really a wondrous thing to know, program and relish such an attempt. However, there are sad curves in the story:-
  • Mono for Android is available only for Windows (and Mac). It is not available for Linux.
  • The installation of the application from Visual Studio and application response for the few clicks is pig slow. It is not Visual Studio's fault. It seems Mono takes quite a bit of time for JITting. After each part of the code is JITed, the application response for that part is fairly ok, but not as good as Android's native\custom VM Dalvik.
  • The trial version does not allow deploying on the device. You can play around and deploy only on the emulator. If you want to use it on the device, it costs. Yes, it costs somewhere between $400-2500, depending on the licesing and support. Pretty expensive!
Try it out (the trial one or the full version if you are rich), at least for fun!
8 comments

Popular posts from this blog

Passing CComPtr By Value !!!

This is about a killer bug identified by our chief software engineer in our software. What was devised for ease of use and write smart code ended up in this killer defect due to improper perception. Ok, let us go!CComPtr is a template class in ATL designed to wrap the discrete functionality of COM object management - AddRef and Release. Technically it is a smart pointer for a COM object.void SomeMethod() { CComPtr siPtr; HRESULT hr = siPtr.CoCreateInstance(CLSID_SomeComponent); siPtr->MethodOne(20, L"Hello"); }Without CComPtr, the code wouldn't be as elegant as above. The code would be spilled with AddRef and Release. Besides, writing code to Release after use under any circumstance is either hard or ugly. CComPtr automatically takes care of releasing in its destructor just like std::auto_ptr. As a C++ programmer, we must be able to appreciate the inevitability of the destructor and its immense use in writing smart code. However there is a difference between …

out, ref and InvokeMember !!!

When I was working on the .NET reflection extravaganza thing that I explained in my previous column, i learnt one another interesting thing, that is about the Type.InvokeMember. How will pass out or ref parameters for the method invoked using Type.InvokeMember ? If you are going to invoke a method with the prototypeint DoSomething(string someString, int someInt);then you would use InvokeMember like this:-object obj = someType.InvokeMember("DoSomething",
BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance,
null,
this,
new object[] {"Largest Integer", 1});or use some variables in the new object[] {...}. But what do you with the args if DoSomething takes out or ref parameters ?int DoSomething(out string someString, ref int someInt);Something like this will not work string someText = string.Empty;
int someInt = 0;
object obj = someType.InvokeMember("DoSomething",
BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic …

Offering __FILE__ and __LINE__ for C# !!!

THIS POST USES SYNTAXHIGHLIGHTER AND HAS ISSUES RENDERING CODE ONLY IN CHROME
Not the same way but we could say better.
Visual Studio 2012, another power packed release of Visual Studio, among a lot of other powerful fancy language features, offers the ability to deduce the method caller details at compile time.
C++ offered the compiler defined macros __FILE__ and __LINE__ (and __DATE__ and __TIME__), which are primarily intended for diagnostic purposes in a program, whereby the caller information is captured and logged. For instance, using __LINE__ would be replaced with the exact line number in the file where this macro has been used. That sometimes beats the purpose and doesn't gives us what we actually expect. Let's see.

For instance, suppose you wish to write a verbose Log method with an idea to print rich diagnostic details, it would look something like this.
void LogException(const std::string& logText, const std::string& fileName, …