[Tutorial] SketchUp Ruby C Extension

thomthom

How did you build it? Seems something has gotten confused and the path has gotten mixed into the name of the initializing procedure for the C Extension.

@chyn2000 said:

LoadError: 127: The specified procedure could not be found. - Init_path_to_project\suext

It tries to call a function named Init_path_to_project\suext - where, given the name suext it should be trying to call Init_suext.

chyn2000

I built in Pelles C.

So, the path isn't hard coded in the program. I can place a copy of the suext.so on my d:\ and it changes the error out put to match:

irb(main):002:0> require 'D:\suext'
LoadError: 127: The specified procedure could not be found. - Init_D:\suext
D:\suext.so
from D:\suext.so
from d:/Ruby/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in `require'
from (irb):2
from :0

Is there a specific directory I should have the file at?

Dan Rathbun

%(#BF8000)[path_to_ruby/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/**custom_require.rb**]

Why are you customizing the require() method ?

Try it WITHOUT loading this custom script...

Jim

@dan rathbun said:

Why are you customizing the require() method ?

He isn't - this is something done by RubyGems.

Dan Rathbun

OK.. my bad.. N/M

Jim

@chyn2000 said:

irb(main):002:0> require 'D:\suext'

You did it again.

Use:

require "D:/suext"


irb(main);001;0> require 'C;\SX_Basics'
LoadError; 127; The specified procedure could not be found.   - Init_C;\SX_Basics
C;\SX_Basics.so
        from C;\SX_Basics.so
        from (irb);1
irb(main);002;0> require 'C;/SX_Basics'
=> true
irb(main);003;0>

Jim

Ok, I just built TBD's suext example using Visual Studio Express 2010.

In order to get the extension to require properly, I had to use:

require "SUExt" <-- note case

require "suext" failed.

chyn2000

@jim said:

Ok, I just built TBD's suext example using Visual Studio Express 2010.

In order to get the extension to require properly, I had to use:

require "SUExt" <-- note case

require "suext" failed.

Yep Jim. That was exactly it!

Thanks everyone. Let me know if there is anything I can do to help.

Actually, it occurs to me that we may want to start making a small library of math and geometry ruby extensions very targeted towards SU. Thoughts?

-Chyn

thomthom

@chyn2000 said:

Actually, it occurs to me that we may want to start making a small library of math and geometry ruby extensions very targeted towards SU. Thoughts?

Not a bad idea. I had plans of doing some bezier functions.

Jim

@chyn2000 said:

Actually, it occurs to me that we may want to start making a small library of math and geometry ruby extensions very targeted towards SU. Thoughts?

Maybe wrapping up an existing library for SketchUp/Ruby would be a way to go? Here's some interesting ones:

[1] http://vcg.sourceforge.net/index.php/Main_Page
[2] http://www.cgal.org/
[3] http://ptex.us/
[4] http://code.google.com/p/ruby-sketchup-sdk/
[5] http://www.visilibity.org/

jefftrull

I was so excited to discover that someone was building Sketchup extensions with Visual Studio 2010 - that's exactly what I need to do - unfortunately, after going through the whole process, I can't seem to successfully load the SX_HelloWorld module:


require 'SX_HelloWorld'
Error; #<LoadError; C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 8/Plugins/SX_HelloWorld.so; 126; The specified module could not be found.   - C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 8/Plugins/SX_HelloWorld.so>
(eval)
(eval);0

Notice this is not a situation where the file is missing - that produces a similar but different error message.

After some Googling it seemed like missing .so's are sometimes the culprit, so I tried copying over some from my Ruby build directory (win32ole.so and Win32API.so), but it didn't help. Finally I tried running Sketchup from the VS2010 command line shell - this resulted in the infamous "bugsplat".

I'm at my wit's end here... any ideas?

Thanks,
Jeff
PS: My Ruby install gives RUBY_PLATFORM=i386-mswin32_100, RUBY_VERSION=1.8.6; Sketchup gives RUBY_PLATFORM=i386-mswin32 and the same version

Dan Rathbun

FYI: When require loads a shared object library file (and not a ruby script,)
the require(filepath) method looks for a C function named:
"Init_" + File.basename( filepath, File.extname(filepath) )
and runs it after loading the shared library.

This means that named C function must exist (even if it does nothing,) and must be named exactly as the file is named (CASE SENSITIVE.) If an enduser renames the so (or dll, dylib, etc.,) file later (including changing the case of any characters,) then loading the library file with require() will fail. (usually resulting in a "entry point not found" error.)

jefftrull

Thanks for the quick response! Unfortunately, I don't think that's the issue, for three reasons:

The error message is "The specified module could not be found", rather than "entry point not found"
I'm using the example file from bitbucket unchanged... the name of the relevant function there is "Init_SX_HelloWorld", vs filename "SX_HelloWorld.so"
I can use this module OK in Ruby standalone (whichever one I built with)

I do think it's got to be something simple... I just can't see what it might be. The error message isn't terribly helpful

Dan Rathbun

BTW your on Windows 7 ??

Is the path:
%(#BF0080)["C:/Program Files (x86)/Google/Google SketchUp 8/Plugins/SX_HelloWorld.so"]

and what is the result of (at the console):
puts $LOAD_PATH

jefftrull

@dan rathbun said:

BTW your on Windows 7 ??

That's right, Windows 7 Professional SP1

@unknownuser said:

Is the path:
%(#BF0080)["C:/Program Files(x86)/Google/Google SketchUp 8/Plugins/SX_HelloWorld.so"]

No, it's "C:/Program Files/Google/Google Sketchup 8/Plugins/SX_HelloWorld.so" (no "(x86)")

@unknownuser said:

and what is the result of (at the console):
puts $LOAD_PATH


puts $LOAD_PATH
C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 8/Plugins
C;/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 8/Tools
nil

Thanks!

thomthom

@jefftrull said:

I can use this module OK in Ruby standalone

Hm... it works in IRB, but not SketchUp?

@jefftrull said:

(whichever one I built with)

Exactly what version of Ruby did you use to build the extension?
Also - did you remember to modify the config.h file as described in the README?

thomthom

The error you report is mentioned in this article: http://apocryph.org/2007/06/16/totally_bullshit_ruby_extension_experience_windows/

However, I did not experience such error... not really sure what the difference is here...

Dan Rathbun

@jefftrull said:

@dan rathbun said:

BTW your on Windows 7 ??

That's right, Windows 7 Professional SP1

@unknownuser said:

Is the path:
%(#BF0080)["C:/Program Files(x86)/Google/Google SketchUp 8/Plugins/SX_HelloWorld.so"]

No, it's "C:/Program Files/Google/Google Sketchup 8/Plugins/SX_HelloWorld.so" (no "(x86)")

So (just to be clear:

1) You installed the 32bit version of Windows 7 ??

2) Are you running Sketchup with the Google supplied "msvcrt-ruby18.DLL" (which is v1.8.6-p287,) or did you replace the "msvcrt-ruby18.DLL" library file in the Sketchup program dir, with the one that you built ??

Dan Rathbun

.. and did you try: require('SX_HelloWorld.so')
(ie, specifying the extension, which should skip the search for a "SX_HelloWorld.rb" file.)

jefftrull

thomthom, thanks for your help. I've suddenly found a formula that works. The key thing is to use the Ruby built from the one-click installer you reference in the README http://rubyforge.org/frs/download.php/47082/ruby186-27_rc2.exe
I hope it doesn't go away anytime soon (it's no longer listed on their index page) - I'm glad you had the direct link, because using either of the two Ruby builds I made from source (one VS2008, one VS2010) fails.

To answer your questions:

yes, it works in irb for all three Ruby builds without problems
I did the config.h hack for the one-click version, but for the VS2008 and VS2010 I was able to compile the extension with the same version of VC++ I used to build Ruby itself, so it wasn't necessary... I think?
All Ruby versions were 1.8.6-p287, chosen to match SketchUp
The apocryph report relates to the need to embed a manifest into the .so file. Following that advice allowed me to compile under VS2008 - under VS2010 no manifest was produced (and its integration was apparently unnecessary)