Sdk Library Difference

[Timothee Cazares]

Ialways thought of a library as a set of objects and functions that focuses on solving a particular problem or a specific area of application development (i.e. database access); and a framework on the other hand as a collection of libraries centered on a particular methodology (i.e. MVC) and which covers all areas of application development.

A framework is a skeleton where the application defines the "meat" of the operation by filling out the skeleton. The skeleton still has code to link up the parts but the most important work is done by the application.

Examples of frameworks: Web application system, Plug-in manager, GUI system. The framework defines the concept but the application defines the fundamental functionality that end-users care about.

For example, on Mac OS X frameworks are just libraries, packed into a bundle. Within the bundle you will find an actual dynamic library (libWhatever.dylib). The difference between a bare library and the framework on Mac is that a framework can contain multiple different versions of the library. It can contain extra resources (images, localized strings, XML data files, UI objects, etc.) and unless the framework is released to public, it usually contains the necessary .h files you need to use the library.

Thus you have everything within a single package you need to use the library in your application (a C/C++/Objective-C library without .h files is pretty useless, unless you write them yourself according to some library documentation), instead of a bunch of files to move around (a Mac bundle is just a directory on the Unix level, but the UI treats it like a single file, pretty much like you have JAR files in Java and when you click it, you usually don't see what's inside, unless you explicitly select to show the content).

A software framework is a re-usable design for a software system (or subsystem). A software framework may include support programs, code libraries, a scripting language, or other software to help develop and glue together the different components of a software project. Various parts of the framework may be exposed through an API..

So I'd say a library is just that, "a library". It is a collection of objects/functions/methods (depending on your language) and your application "links" against it and thus can use the objects/functions/methods. It is basically a file containing re-usable code that can usually be shared among multiple applications (you don't have to write the same code over and over again).

A framework can be everything you use in application development. It can be a library, a collection of many libraries, a collection of scripts, or any piece of software you need to create your application. Framework is just a very vague term.

Here's an article about some guy regarding the topic "Library vs. Framework". I personally think this article is highly arguable. It's not wrong what he's saying there, however, he's just picking out one of the multiple definitions of framework and compares that to the classic definition of library. E.g. he says you need a framework for sub-classing. Really? I can have an object defined in a library, I can link against it, and sub-class it in my code. I don't see how I need a "framework" for that. In some way he rather explains how the term framework is used nowadays. It's just a hyped word, as I said before. Some companies release just a normal library (in any sense of a classical library) and call it a "framework" because it sounds more fancy.

A framework embodies some abstract design, with more behavior built in. In order to use it you need to insert your behavior into various places in the framework either by subclassing or by plugging in your own classes. The framework's code then calls your code at these points.

It is just a collection of routines (functional programming) or class definitions(object oriented programming). The reason behind is simply code reuse, i.e. get the code that has already been written by other developers. The classes or routines normally define specific operations in a domain specific area. For example, there are some libraries of mathematics which can let developer just call the function without redo the implementation of how an algorithm works.

In framework, all the control flow is already there, and there are a bunch of predefined white spots that we should fill out with our code. A framework is normally more complex. It defines a skeleton where the application defines its own features to fill out the skeleton. In this way, your code will be called by the framework when appropriately. The benefit is that developers do not need to worry about if a design is good or not, but just about implementing domain specific functions.

Both of them defined API, which is used for programmers to use. To put those together, we can think of a library as a certain function of an application, a framework as the skeleton of the application, and an API is connector to put those together. A typical development process normally starts with a framework, and fill out functions defined in libraries through API.

I like Cohens answer, but a more technical definition is: Your code calls a library. A framework calls your code. For example a GUI framework calls your code through event-handlers. A web framework calls your code through some request-response model.

This is also called inversion of control - suddenly the framework decides when and how to execute you code rather than the other way around as with libraries. This means that a framework also have a much larger impact on how you have to structure your code.

Now, if you consider only one ingredient, like say oil. You can't use any oil you want because then it will ruin your fish (data). You can only use Olive Oil. Compare that with underscore.js. Now what brand of oil you want to use is up to you. Some dish was made with American Olive Oil (underscore.js) or Indian Olive Oil (lodash.js). This will only change the taste of your application. Since they serve almost the same purpose, their use depends on the developer's preference and they are easily replaceable.

Let's imagine that you had opened a burger restaurant in your city a while ago. But you feel it's so hard to make a burger as a beginner. You were thinking about an easy way to make burgers for customers.Someone told you that If you use framework, you can make bugger easily. and you got to know that there are McDonald Burger Framework and BurgerKing Burger Framework.

Anyway, In the end, they are all burgers. An important thing here is, you have to follow their framework's rule to make burgers. otherwise, you feel even harder to make it or won't be able to make it.

If you use this Library, you can make whatever burger patty so easily (X2 speed).It doesn't really matter if you use McDonald Burger Framework or BurgerKing Burger Framework.Either way, you can still use this Simple Burger-Patty Library. (Even you can use this Library without frameworks.)

A library implements functionality for a narrowly-scoped purpose whereas a framework tends to be a collection of libraries providing support for a wider range of features. For example, the library System.Drawing.dll handles drawing functionality, but is only one part of the overall .NET framework.

Libraries are for ease of use and efficiency.You can say for example that Zend library helps us accomplish different tasks with its well defined classes and functions.While a framework is something that usually forces a certain way of implementing a solution, like MVC(Model-view-controller)(reference). It is a well-defined system for the distribution of tasks like in MVC.Model contains database side,Views are for UI Interface, and controllers are for Business logic.

Framework is library + RUNTIME ENVIRONMENT. For example, ASP.NET is a framework: it accepts HTTP requests, create page object, invoke life cycle events, etc. Framework does all this, you write a bit of code which will be run at a specific time of the life cycle of current request!

Your interpretation sounds pretty good to me... A library could be anything that's compiled and self-contained for re-use in other code, there's literally no restriction on its content.

I think you pinned down quite well the difference: the framework provides a frame in which we do our work... Somehow, it is more "constraining" than a simple library.

The framework is also supposed to add consistency to a set of libraries.

Library - Any set of classes or components that can be used as the client deems fit to accomplish a certain task.

Framework - mandates certain guidelines for you to "plug-in" into something bigger than you. You merely provide the pieces specific to your application/requirements in a published-required manner, so that 'the framwework can make your life easy'

That problem can be log or debuging info in an application, draw charts, create an specific file format (html, pdf, xls), connect to a data base, create a part of an application or a complete application or a code applied to a Design Pattern.

You can have a Framework or a Library to solve all these problems and many more, normaly the frameworks helps you to solve more complex or bigger problems, but that a consecuence of their main difference, not a main definition for both.

The main difference betwen a Library and a Framework is the dependency betwen their own code, in oder words to use a Framework you need to use almost all the classes, modules or code in the FW, but to use a Library you can use one or few classes, modules or code in the lib in your own application

This means that if a Framework has, for example has 50 classes in order to use the framework in an app you need to use, let said, 10-15 or more classes in your code, because that is how is designed a Framework, some classes (objects of that classes) are inputs/parameters for methods in other classes in the framework. See the .NET framework, Spring, or any MVC framework.

3a8082e126