Dynamic-Link libraries (DLL) are an integrated part of the Windows platform from its very beginning. DLLs allow encapsulation of a piece of functionality in a standalone module with an explicit list of C functions that are available for external users. In 1980’s, when Windows DLLs were introduced to the world, the only viable option to speak to broad development audience was C language. So, naturally, Windows DLLs exposed their functionality as C functions and data. Internally, a DLL may be implemented in any language, but in order to be used from other languages and environments, a DLL interface should fall back to the lowest common denominator – the C language.
Using the C interface does not automatically mean that a developer should give up object oriented approach. Even the C interface can be used for true object oriented programming, though it may be a tedious way of doing things. Unsurprisingly, the second most used programming language in the world, namely C++, could not help but to fall prey to the temptation of a DLL. However, opposite to the C language, where the binary interface between a caller and a callee is well-defined and widely accepted, in the C++ world, there is no recognized application binary interface (ABI). In practice, it means that binary code that is generated by a C++ compiler is not compatible with other C++ compilers. Moreover, the binary code of the same C++ compiler may be incompatible with other versions of this compiler. All this makes exporting C++ classes from a DLL quite an adventure.
The purpose of this article is to show several methods of exporting C++ classes from a DLL module. The source code demonstrates different techniques of exporting the imaginary Xyz object. The Xyz object is very simple, and has only one method: Foo.
Here is the diagram of the object Xyz:
| Xyz |
|---|
int Foo(int) |
The implementation of the Xyz object is inside a DLL, which can be distributed to a wide range of clients. A user can access Xyz functionality by:
The source code consists of two projects:
The XyzLibrary project exports its code with the following handy macro:
#if defined(XYZLIBRARY_EXPORT) // inside DLL
# define XYZAPI __declspec(dllexport)
#else // outside DLL
# define XYZAPI __declspec(dllimport)
#endif // XYZLIBRARY_EXPORT
The XYZLIBRARY_EXPORT symbol is defined only for the XyzLibrary project, so the XYZAPI macro expands into __declspec(dllexport) for the DLL build and into __declspec(dllimport) for the client build.
The classic C language approach to object oriented programming is the usage of opaque pointers, i.e., handles. A user calls a function that creates an object internally, and returns a handle to that object. Then, the user calls various functions that accept the handle as a parameter and performs all kinds of operations on the object. A good example of the handle usage is the Win32 windowing API that uses an HWND handle to represent a window. The imaginary Xyz object is exported via a C interface, like this:
typedef tagXYZHANDLE {} * XYZHANDLE;
// Factory function that creates instances of the Xyz object.
XYZAPI XYZHANDLE APIENTRY GetXyz(VOID);
// Calls Xyz.Foo method.
XYZAPI INT APIENTRY XyzFoo(XYZHANDLE handle, INT n);
// Releases Xyz instance and frees resources.
XYZAPI VOID APIENTRY XyzRelease(XYZHANDLE handle);
// APIENTRY is defined as __stdcall in WinDef.h header.
Here is an example of how a client's C code might look like:
#include "XyzLibrary.h"
...
/* Create Xyz instance. */
XYZHANDLE hXyz = GetXyz();
if(hXyz)
{
/* Call Xyz.Foo method. */
XyzFoo(hXyz, 42);
/* Destroy Xyz instance and release acquired resources. */
XyzRelease(hXyz);
/* Be defensive. */
hXyz = NULL;
}
With this approach, a DLL must provide explicit functions for object creation and deletion.
It is important to remember to specify the calling convention for all exported functions. Omitted calling convention is a very common mistake that many beginners do. As long as the default client's calling convention matches that of the DLL, everything works. But, once the client changes its calling convention, it goes unnoticed by the developer until runtime crashes occur. The XyzLibrary project uses the APIENTRY macro, which is defined as __stdcall in the "WinDef.h" header file.
No C++ exception is allowed to cross over the DLL boundary. Period. The C language knows nothing about C++ exceptions, and cannot handle them properly. If an object method needs to report an error, then a return code should be used.
/* void* GetSomeOtherObject(void) is declared elsewhere. */
XYZHANDLE h = GetSomeOtherObject();
/* Oops! Error: Calling Xyz.Foo on wrong object intance. */
XyzFoo(h, 42);
XyzRelease at all points of exit from a function. If the developer forgets to call XyzRelease, then resources are leaked because the compiler doesn't help to track the lifetime of an object instance. Programming languages that support destructors or have a garbage collector may mitigate this problem by making a wrapper over the C interface. int, double, char*, etc.) as return types and method parameters. Almost every modern C++ compiler that exists on the Windows platform supports exporting a C++ class from a DLL. Exporting a C++ class is quite similar to exporting C functions. All that a developer is required to do is to use the __declspec(dllexport/dllimport) specifier before the class name if the whole class needs to be exported, or before the method declarations if only specific class methods need to be exported. Here is a code snippet:
// The whole CXyz class is exported with all its methods and members.
//
class XYZAPI CXyz
{
public:
int Foo(int n);
};
// Only CXyz::Foo method is exported.
//
class CXyz
{
public:
XYZAPI int Foo(int n);
};
There is no need to explicitly specify a calling convention for exporting classes or their methods. By default, the C++ compiler uses the __thiscall calling convention for class methods. However, due to different naming decoration schemes that are used by different compilers, the exported C++ class can only be used by the same compiler and by the same version of the compiler. Here is an example of a naming decoration that is applied by the MS Visual C++ compiler:
Notice how the decorated names are different from the original C++ names. Following is a screenshot of the same DLL module with name decoration deciphered by the Dependency Walker tool:
Only the MS Visual C++ compiler can use this DLL now. Both the DLL and the client code must be compiled with the same version of MS Visual C++ in order to ensure that the naming decoration scheme matches between the caller and the callee. Here is an example of a client code that uses the Xyz object:
#include "XyzLibrary.h"
...
// Client uses Xyz object as a regular C++ class.
CXyz xyz;
xyz.Foo(42);
As you can see, the usage of an exported class is pretty much the same as the usage of any other C++ class. Nothing special.
Important: Using a DLL that exports C++ classes should be considered no different than using a static library. All rules that apply to a static library that contains C++ code are fully applicable to a DLL that exports C++ classes.
A careful reader must have already noticed that the Dependency Walker tool showes an additional exported member, that is the CXyz& CXyz::operator =(const CXyz&) assignment operator. What we see is our C++ money at work. According to the C++ Standard, every class has four special member functions:
If the author of a class does not declare and does not provide an implementation of these members, then the C++ compiler declares them, and generates an implicit default implementation. In the case of the CXyz class, the compiler decided that the default constructor, copy constructor, and the destructor are trivial enough, and optimized them out. However, the assignment operator survived optimization and got exported from a DLL.
Important: Marking the class as exported with the __declspec(dllexport) specifier tells the compiler to attempt to export everything that is related to the class. It includes all class data members, all class member functions (either explicitly declared, or implicitly generated by the compiler), all base classes of the class, and all their members. Consider:
class Base
{
...
};
class Data
{
...
};
// MS Visual C++ compiler emits C4275 warning about not exported base class.
class __declspec(dllexport) Derived :
public Base
{
...
private:
Data m_data; // C4251 warning about not exported data member.
};
In the above code snippet, the compiler will warn you about the not exported base class and the not exported class of the data member. So, in order to export a C++ class successfully, a developer is required to export all the relevant base classes and all the classes that are used for the definition of the data members. This snowball exporting requirement is a significant drawback. That is why, for instance, it is very hard and tiresome to export classes that are derived from STL templates or to use STL templates as data members. An instantiation of an STL container like std::map<>, for example, may require tens of additional internal classes to be exported.
An exported C++ class may throw an exception without any problem. Because of the fact that the same version of the same C++ compiler is used both by a DLL and its client, C++ exceptions are thrown and caught across DLL boundaries as if there were no boundaries at all. Remember, using a DLL that exports C++ code is the same as using a static library with the same code.
A C++ abstract interface (i.e., a C++ class that contains only pure virtual methods and no data members) tries to get the best of both worlds: a compiler independent clean interface to an object, and a convenient object oriented way of method calls. All that is required to do is to provide a header file with an interface declaration and implement a factory function that will return the newly created object instances. Only the factory function has to be declared with the __declspec(dllexport/dllimport) specifier. The interface does not require any additional specifiers.
// The abstract interface for Xyz object.
// No extra specifiers required.
struct IXyz
{
virtual int Foo(int n) = 0;
virtual void Release() = 0;
};
// Factory function that creates instances of the Xyz object.
extern "C" XYZAPI IXyz* APIENTRY GetXyz();
In the above code snippet, the factory function GetXyz is declared as extern "C". It is required in order to prevent the mangling of the function name. So, this function is exposed as a regular C function, and can be easily recognized by any C-compatible compiler. This is how the client code looks like, when using an abstract interface:
#include "XyzLibrary.h"
...
IXyz* pXyz = ::GetXyz();
if(pXyz)
{
pXyz->Foo(42);
pXyz->Release();
pXyz = NULL;
}
C++ does not provide a special notion for an interface as other programming languages do (for example, C# or Java). But it does not mean that C++ cannot declare and implement interfaces. The common approach to make a C++ interface is to declare an abstract class without any data members. Then, another separate class inherits from the interface and implements interface methods, but the implementation is hidden from the interface clients. The interface client neither knows nor cares about how the interface is implemented. All it knows is which methods are available and what they do.
The idea behind this approach is very simple. A member-less C++ class that consisting of pure virtual methods only is nothing more than a virtual table, i.e., an array of function pointers. This array of function pointers is filled within a DLL with whatever an author deems necessary to fill. Then, this array of pointers is used outside of a DLL to call the actual implementation. Bellow is the diagram that illustrates the IXyz interface usage.
Click on the image to view the full sized diagram in a new window:
The above diagram shows the IXyz interface that is used both by the DLL and the EXE modules. Inside the DLL module, the XyzImpl class inherits from the IXyz interface, and implements its methods. Method calls in the EXE module invoke the actual implementation in the DLL module via a virtual table.
The short explanation is: because COM technology works with other compilers. Now, for the long explanation. Actually, using a member-less abstract class as an interface between modules is exactly what COM does in order to expose COM interfaces. The notion of a virtual table, as we know it in the C++ language, fits nicely into the specification of the COM standard. This is not a coincidence. The C++ language, being the mainstream development language for at least over a decade now, has been used extensively with COM programming. It is thanks to natural support for object oriented programming in the C++ language. It is not surprising at all that Microsoft has considered the C++ language as the main heavy-duty instrument for industrial COM development. Being the owner of the COM technology, Microsoft has ensured that the COM binary standard and their own C++ object model implementation in the Visual C++ compiler do match, with as little overhead as possible.
No wonder that other C++ compiler vendors jumped on the bandwagon and implemented the virtual table layout in their compilers in the same way as Microsoft did. After all, everybody wanted to support COM technology, and to be compatible with the existing solution from Microsoft. A hypothetical C++ compiler that fails to support COM efficiently is doomed to oblivion in the Windows market. That is why ,nowadays, exposing a C++ class from a DLL via an abstract interface will work reliably with every decent C++ compiler on the Windows platform.
In order to ensure proper resource release, an abstract interface provides an additional method for the disposal of an instance. Calling this method manually can be tedious and error prone. We all know how common this error is in the C world where the developer has to remember to free the resources with an explicit function call. That's why typical C++ code uses RAII idiom generously with the help of smart pointers. The XyzExecutable project uses the AutoClosePtr template, which is provided with the example. The AutoClosePtr template is the simplest implementation of a smart pointer that calls an arbitrary method of a class to destroy an instance instead of operator delete. Here is a code snippet that demonstrates the usage of a smart pointer with the IXyz interface:
#include "XyzLibrary.h"
#include "AutoClosePtr.h"
...
typedef AutoClosePtr<IXyz, void, &IXyz::Release> IXyzPtr;
IXyzPtr ptrXyz(::GetXyz());
if(ptrXyz)
{
ptrXyz->Foo(42);
}
// No need to call ptrXyz->Release(). Smart pointer
// will call this method automatically in the destructor.
Using a smart pointer will ensure that the Xyz object is properly released, no matter what. A function can exit prematurely because of an error or an internal exception, but the C++ language guarantees that destructors of all local objects will be called upon the exit.
In the same way as a COM interface is not allowed to leak any internal exception, the abstract C++ interface cannot let any internal exception to break through DLL boundaries. Class methods should use return codes to indicate an error. The implementation for handling C++ exceptions is very specific to each compiler, and cannot be shared. So, in this respect, an abstract C++ interface should behave as a plain C function.
int, double, char*, etc.) or another abstract interface. It is the same limitation as for COM interfaces. The Standard C++ Library containers (like vector, list, or map) and other templates were not designed with DLL modules in mind. The C++ Standard is silent about DLLs because this is a platform specific technology, and it is not necessarily present on other platforms where the C++ language is used. Currently, the MS Visual C++ compiler can export and import instantiations of STL classes which a developer explicitly marks with the __declspec(dllexport/dllimport) specifier. The compiler emits a couple of nasty warnings, but it works. However, one must remember that exporting STL template instantiations is in no way different from exporting regular C++ classes, with all accompanying limitations. So, there is nothing special about STL in that respect.
The article discussed different methods of exporting a C++ object from a DLL module. Detailed description is given of the advantages and disadvantages for each method. Exception safety considerations are outlined. The following conclusions are made:
The C++ programming language is a powerful, versatile, and flexible development instrument.
| You must Sign In to use this message board. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Can you tell me why?
