www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - What is the current state of D for android development?

reply "js.mdnq" <js_adddot+mdng gmail.com> writes:
I would like to get into writing apps for android and would like 
to choose D for this if it is mature enough.

What is the D progress on the android?

I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton 
of information:

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1
Mar 27 2013
next sibling parent reply "js.mdnq" <js_adddot+mdng gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 28 March 2013 at 06:13:17 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would 
 like to choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton 
 of information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


I guess that means none... :/
Mar 28 2013
next sibling parent reply "BLM768" <blm768 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 29 March 2013 at 06:35:10 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:

 I guess that means none... :/


Unfortunately, there hasn't been a lot of focus on ARM platforms; 
people are too busy improving the language and tools to work on 
standard PC hardware. The DMD compiler definitely won't work for 
Android development, but I'm pretty sure that GDC can be compiled 
for ARM output, and I think LDC has that capability as well. 
You'd probably need to write your own linkscripts, and the 
runtime would definitely have to be modified.
Mar 29 2013
parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 29 March 2013 at 07:02:24 UTC, BLM768 wrote:

 On Friday, 29 March 2013 at 06:35:10 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:

 I guess that means none... :/


 Unfortunately, there hasn't been a lot of focus on ARM 
 platforms; people are too busy improving the language and tools 
 to work on standard PC hardware. The DMD compiler definitely 
 won't work for Android development, but I'm pretty sure that 
 GDC can be compiled for ARM output, and I think LDC has that 
 capability as well. You'd probably need to write your own 
 linkscripts, and the runtime would definitely have to be 
 modified.


Being able to codegen is easy. But the runtime needs to follow, 
and that another issue altogether.
Mar 29 2013
prev sibling parent reply Benjamin Thaut <code benjamin-thaut.de> writes:
Am 29.03.2013 07:35, schrieb js.mdnq:

 On Thursday, 28 March 2013 at 06:13:17 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would like to
 choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton of
 information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


 I guess that means none... :/


Some time ago there was a post on the newsgroup of someone that had a 
working GDC which would output ARM binaries and he even converted the 
most important parts of druntime to work for android to. But 
unfortunately I can't remember where that was.

Kind Regards
Bejamin Thaut
Mar 29 2013
next sibling parent =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 03/29/2013 02:32 AM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:

 Am 29.03.2013 07:35, schrieb js.mdnq:

 On Thursday, 28 March 2013 at 06:13:17 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would like to
 choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton of
 information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


 I guess that means none... :/


 Some time ago there was a post on the newsgroup of someone that had a
 working GDC which would output ARM binaries and he even converted the
 most important parts of druntime to work for android to. But
 unfortunately I can't remember where that was.

 Kind Regards
 Bejamin Thaut


I haven't tried it myself but there is this information:

   http://gdcproject.org/wiki/Cross%20Compiler/crosstool-NG

Ali
Mar 29 2013
prev sibling parent reply "jerro" <a a.com> writes:
 Some time ago there was a post on the newsgroup of someone that 
 had a working GDC which would output ARM binaries and he even 
 converted the most important parts of druntime to work for 
 android to. But unfortunately I can't remember where that was.


Johannes Pfau has a GDC fork with Android support here:
https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/tree/android

and build scripts that build NDK with D support here:
https://github.com/jpf91/gdc-android-scripts
Mar 29 2013
parent Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> writes:
Am Fri, 29 Mar 2013 22:39:52 +0100
schrieb "jerro" <a a.com>:


 Some time ago there was a post on the newsgroup of someone that 
 had a working GDC which would output ARM binaries and he even 
 converted the most important parts of druntime to work for 
 android to. But unfortunately I can't remember where that was.


 
 Johannes Pfau has a GDC fork with Android support here:
 https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/tree/android
 
 and build scripts that build NDK with D support here:
 https://github.com/jpf91/gdc-android-scripts


But it's probably horribly outdated now ;-)
I'll have to revisit this when shared library support is stable.
Mar 30 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 28 March 2013 at 06:13:17 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would 
 like to choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton 
 of information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


That is one of dark sides of comunity-driven development. 
Techincally, it is possible: at least GDC can do ARM code gen, 
there is nothing inherently blocking the port in language design. 
What is required is that someone will actually take his time to 
port druntime and test everything. And that supposes some 
substantial time investments from someone both familiar with 
druntime and interested in Android dev. Looks like no such person 
exist so far.
Mar 29 2013
prev sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On 28.03.2013 07:13, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would like to
 choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton of
 information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


Please note that native development in Android has a second class status.

Support is only available as a means to bring "legacy" C and C++ code to
the platform.

The few Android APIs available to languages outside the Dalvik world are 
actually wrappers around JNI calls.

--
Paulo
Mar 29 2013
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:45:33 +0100
Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 On 28.03.2013 07:13, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would like to
 choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton of
 information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


 
 Please note that native development in Android has a second class
 status.
 
 Support is only available as a means to bring "legacy" C and C++ code
 to the platform.
 
 The few Android APIs available to languages outside the Dalvik world
 are actually wrappers around JNI calls.
 


That's actually something that's been rolling around in my head for
months, and now that it's brought up again, I have to just go ahead and
say it:

What...the *FUCK* is Google thinking???

How is it *possible* that the one company in the word that's been
known, more than any other, for recruiting as many of the supposedly
best and brightest developers in the world as they possibly can,
portrayed by approximately...everyone in the world...as being
practically a developer's utopia, with nary a pointy-hair in sight, and
the streets paved with latte, can be so incredibly dumb as to decide
"Hey, let's make our system API be *JVM-only* (ok, "JVM-knockoff",
whatever, like it even matters) and marginalize native in general, and
shit all over the idea of being anything more than halfway Posix"??
Even *Apple* isn't that goddamn stupid, for crap's sakes, and *Apple*
was never a developer's company, it was run by a dicatoring *salesman*!
A drugged-out fucking *salesman* for fuck's sakes, and even *they*
didn't botch things up *that* badly!

Not only that, but this is the same - apparently schizophrenic -
company that's been trying to push the *Google* **NATIVE** **CLIENT**,
ie NaCl!!

[Just insert a mental image right here of Lewis Black's trademark
freak-out saying "What...the...FUUUCK?!?']

Sheesh.

Sorry, had to get it outta my system...
Mar 29 2013
next sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On 30.03.2013 05:58, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:45:33 +0100
 Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 On 28.03.2013 07:13, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would like to
 choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton of
 information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


 Please note that native development in Android has a second class
 status.

 Support is only available as a means to bring "legacy" C and C++ code
 to the platform.

 The few Android APIs available to languages outside the Dalvik world
 are actually wrappers around JNI calls.


 That's actually something that's been rolling around in my head for
 months, and now that it's brought up again, I have to just go ahead and
 say it:

 What...the *FUCK* is Google thinking???

 How is it *possible* that the one company in the word that's been
 known, more than any other, for recruiting as many of the supposedly
 best and brightest developers in the world as they possibly can,
 portrayed by approximately...everyone in the world...as being
 practically a developer's utopia, with nary a pointy-hair in sight, and
 the streets paved with latte, can be so incredibly dumb as to decide
 "Hey, let's make our system API be *JVM-only* (ok, "JVM-knockoff",
 whatever, like it even matters) and marginalize native in general, and
 shit all over the idea of being anything more than halfway Posix"??
 Even *Apple* isn't that goddamn stupid, for crap's sakes, and *Apple*
 was never a developer's company, it was run by a dicatoring *salesman*!
 A drugged-out fucking *salesman* for fuck's sakes, and even *they*
 didn't botch things up *that* badly!

 Not only that, but this is the same - apparently schizophrenic -
 company that's been trying to push the *Google* **NATIVE** **CLIENT**,
 ie NaCl!!

 [Just insert a mental image right here of Lewis Black's trademark
 freak-out saying "What...the...FUUUCK?!?']

 Sheesh.

 Sorry, had to get it outta my system...


Personally my issue is another one.

I don't mind that they use Java (the language), but I think that instead 
of having the effort of implementing Dalvik, they could
have implemented a native code compiler instead.

This way the platform would be fully native.

This is Microsoft current approach, regardless of C++ or .NET, since
Windows Phone 8, everything is compiled to native code.

As for POSIX compatibility, it is oversold. You only have APIs for
command line applications and daemons, and like any standard, it has
undefined behaviors, with each vendor having a different idea what POSIX
means.

Nowadays they could even support Go in the platform, but the Android 
group does not seem to care that much (issue was created by me).

http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=39482

--
Paulo
Mar 29 2013
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 07:47:56 +0100
Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 On 30.03.2013 05:58, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:45:33 +0100
 Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 On 28.03.2013 07:13, js.mdnq wrote:

 I would like to get into writing apps for android and would like
 to choose D for this if it is mature enough.

 What is the D progress on the android?

 I see that at least others are interested but not finding a ton of
 information:

 http://forum.dlang.org/thread/20120204203109.26c9a80b jpf-laptop?page=1


 Please note that native development in Android has a second class
 status.

 Support is only available as a means to bring "legacy" C and C++
 code to the platform.

 The few Android APIs available to languages outside the Dalvik
 world are actually wrappers around JNI calls.


 That's actually something that's been rolling around in my head for
 months, and now that it's brought up again, I have to just go ahead
 and say it:

 What...the *FUCK* is Google thinking???

 How is it *possible* that the one company in the word that's been
 known, more than any other, for recruiting as many of the supposedly
 best and brightest developers in the world as they possibly can,
 portrayed by approximately...everyone in the world...as being
 practically a developer's utopia, with nary a pointy-hair in sight,
 and the streets paved with latte, can be so incredibly dumb as to
 decide "Hey, let's make our system API be *JVM-only* (ok,
 "JVM-knockoff", whatever, like it even matters) and marginalize
 native in general, and shit all over the idea of being anything
 more than halfway Posix"?? Even *Apple* isn't that goddamn stupid,
 for crap's sakes, and *Apple* was never a developer's company, it
 was run by a dicatoring *salesman*! A drugged-out fucking
 *salesman* for fuck's sakes, and even *they* didn't botch things up
 *that* badly!

 Not only that, but this is the same - apparently schizophrenic -
 company that's been trying to push the *Google* **NATIVE**
 **CLIENT**, ie NaCl!!

 [Just insert a mental image right here of Lewis Black's trademark
 freak-out saying "What...the...FUUUCK?!?']

 Sheesh.

 Sorry, had to get it outta my system...


 
 Personally my issue is another one.
 
 I don't mind that they use Java (the language), but I think that
 instead of having the effort of implementing Dalvik, they could
 have implemented a native code compiler instead.
 
 This way the platform would be fully native.
 
 This is Microsoft current approach, regardless of C++ or .NET, since
 Windows Phone 8, everything is compiled to native code.
 


Exactly. It just makes no sense how they see such little point in
native. They've created a *real* machine that exists almost entirely to
run a *virtual* machine. WTF is the point of that, if not to
deliberately waste both hardware and developer resources? And on a
portable, too - one of the top places where efficiency is particularly
important.


 As for POSIX compatibility, it is oversold. You only have APIs for
 command line applications and daemons, and like any standard, it has
 undefined behaviors, with each vendor having a different idea what
 POSIX means.
 
 Nowadays they could even support Go in the platform, but the Android 
 group does not seem to care that much (issue was created by me).
 
 http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=39482
 


I find this part particularly hilarious:

"the Go compilers only generate static executables right now. Which
means: ... - These programs *cannot* run in a Dalvik VM."

You've got the Go team which has historically been staunchly opposed to
dynamic linking, and the Android team ten miles in the opposite
direction. Classic corporate "left-hand vs right-hand" discrepancy.
Makes them sound like Sony or MS.
Mar 30 2013
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-03-30 08:26, Nick Sabalausky wrote:


 You've got the Go team which has historically been staunchly opposed to
 dynamic linking, and the Android team ten miles in the opposite
 direction. Classic corporate "left-hand vs right-hand" discrepancy.
 Makes them sound like Sony or MS.


That's one thing Apple is good at, having the different parts of the 
company work together. They don't care if a particular device sells less 
because of another device, as long as they sell more combined.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Mar 30 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
I hate this decision, too, but in case you wander, initial 
rationale for restricting everything to VM was an attempt to 
fight device h/w fragmentization and avoid necessity to build 
different application versions for different devices.

Failed attempt, obviously.

Apple have never needed that though as they 100% control device 
hardware their OS runs on.
Mar 30 2013
next sibling parent "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
%s/wander/wonder/g
Mar 30 2013
prev sibling parent reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On 30.03.2013 10:43, Dicebot wrote:

 I hate this decision, too, but in case you wander, initial rationale for
 restricting everything to VM was an attempt to fight device h/w
 fragmentization and avoid necessity to build different application
 versions for different devices.

 Failed attempt, obviously.

 Apple have never needed that though as they 100% control device hardware
 their OS runs on.


You can achieve this by bytecodes that get compiled on the fly at 
installation time.

This is how Windows Phone 8 works, by using an offline compiler on 
Windows Store to compile .NET to native code, thus you only install
native code, there is no JIT on the devices.

Or how Windows CE used platform neutral binaries, known as Common
Executable Format (CEF).

Nowadays I think the best way is a mixture of JIT + AOT, similar to what
functional programming languages offer.

--
Paulo
Mar 30 2013
next sibling parent reply "Dicebot" <m.strashun gmail.com> writes:
I have always wondered how it is done by Win 8. It requires 
knowledge of every single released device from Microsoft side, 
isn't it? How will it scale?
Mar 30 2013
parent "jerro" <a a.com> writes:
On Saturday, 30 March 2013 at 09:55:27 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 I have always wondered how it is done by Win 8. It requires 
 knowledge of every single released device from Microsoft side, 
 isn't it? How will it scale?


Doesn't it only require knowledge of every architecture? And 
supporting ARM and x86 would cover a great majority of devices. 
They could improve performance by targeting specific versions of 
the architecture, such as ARMv7 or x86_64, but even without that, 
performance would likely be better than that of a JIT.
Mar 30 2013
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:53:31 +0100
Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 On 30.03.2013 10:43, Dicebot wrote:

 I hate this decision, too, but in case you wander, initial
 rationale for restricting everything to VM was an attempt to fight
 device h/w fragmentization and avoid necessity to build different
 application versions for different devices.

 Failed attempt, obviously.




Which begs the question, "Why haven't they noticed this and stopped
treating native as second-class?"


 Apple have never needed that though as they 100% control device
 hardware their OS runs on.


 
 You can achieve this by bytecodes that get compiled on the fly at 
 installation time.
 
 This is how Windows Phone 8 works, by using an offline compiler on 
 Windows Store to compile .NET to native code, thus you only install
 native code, there is no JIT on the devices.
 


Unless the bytecode is both comparable to LLVM and has an escape hatch
to include real pre-compiled binary data, then that still bugs me.

STill a huge improvement over Android, though. Well, except that the
user has to use Win8 ;)
Mar 30 2013
next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On 30.03.2013 16:46, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:53:31 +0100
 Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:


 This is how Windows Phone 8 works, by using an offline compiler on
 Windows Store to compile .NET to native code, thus you only install
 native code, there is no JIT on the devices.


 Unless the bytecode is both comparable to LLVM and has an escape hatch
 to include real pre-compiled binary data, then that still bugs me.

 STill a huge improvement over Android, though. Well, except that the
 user has to use Win8 ;)


They use a format known as MDIL (Machine Dependent Intermediate Language).

Basically everything is compiled down to machine code, except for memory
references and labels.

Linking is performed at installation time on the device. This allows the
code to be made available in native format, while keeping the 
flexibility of dynamic libraries to be in sync with operating system 
updates.

More information here,

http://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Mani-Ramaswamy-and-Peter-Sollich-Inside-Compiler-in-the-Cloud-and-MDIL

http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2012/3-005

--
Paulo
Mar 30 2013
prev sibling parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 30 March 2013 at 15:46:58 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Unless the bytecode is both comparable to LLVM and has an 
 escape hatch
 to include real pre-compiled binary data, then that still bugs 
 me.

 STill a huge improvement over Android, though. Well, except 
 that the
 user has to use Win8 ;)


At infrastructure level, this is also quite scary that everything 
is done in MS server farm.
Mar 31 2013
parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
On 31.03.2013 14:29, deadalnix wrote:

 On Saturday, 30 March 2013 at 15:46:58 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Unless the bytecode is both comparable to LLVM and has an escape hatch
 to include real pre-compiled binary data, then that still bugs me.

 STill a huge improvement over Android, though. Well, except that the
 user has to use Win8 ;)


 At infrastructure level, this is also quite scary that everything is
 done in MS server farm.


It is no different than any other commercial vendor.
Mar 31 2013