API Sets, SxS manifests, Visual C++ linker delay loading, .NET Assembly loading and related fusion cache, UWP sandbox loading, are some examples of changes the original dependency walker isn't capable to handle.
But I hate how this software comes with dozens of DLLs. I like to chuck these tools in sa single directory, and this is one that I have to put in a separate folder. DependencyWalker was better in this regard.
You see these as the program trying to import nonexistent DLL files that start with the name "api-ms-win-". Dependency Walker can't handle those imports at all, it only deals with real DLL files.
I thought at first it was a way to share the symbol tables between multiple instances (though you could use memory mapping), but then I read this in the README.md:
> Server is written in C, with no special headers or SDK used.
So maybe it helps them keep the parser simpler? Decouples that part from the GUI in a way they prefer?
Nice project, just as a challenge / piece of feedback - most of the time you don't actually need to have a C backend for this type of project. The challenge is to get all the P/Invoke signatures and struct declarations / pointer walking correct on .Net. The benefit being a single managed EXE and no need for cross process communication and the edge cases it brings.
(Source: Have built a full SCSI interop layer in .Net to do low level CD ripping, full with native pointer walking and all. Have also written tools to walk the PEB (process environment block) in .Net w/ no native backends.)
Which is the reason that to this day I remain a big C++/CLI fan.
It is still much easier than dealing with P/Invoke and COM from .NET code.
Create a nice wrapper, exposing C# compatible types and we're done.
In regards to COM, not even the CCW/RCW replacement is as developer friendly as VB 6 or Delphi.
I have some hopes that Secure Future Initiative will finally give the spotlight to .NET on Windows, that Windows team keeps pushing away, unlike what happens on Apple and Google platforms.
It helps, but when one has enough C++ knowledge, I still consider C++/CLI a better solution instead of yet another tool, that might not understand everything.
Now if doing cross platform code, C++/CLI is naturally not an option.
Most certainly they keep having similar tooling in Redmond.