I want to create a structure with field color, that can consider n characters. So, how can i create it without certain size:
struct A {
int width;
int height;
int length;
char name[50];
**char color[];**
};
struct A a = { 10, 20, 30, "Hello", "Red" };
I tried test it without structure and all is working, why ?
char p[] = "Hallo";
The most straight forward way to do this on a modern system with an operating system is to use malloc/free:
struct A {
int width;
int height;
int length;
char name[50];
char *color;
};
Here color is just a pointer type to a memory location that is of type char.
How to use it?
Use malloc to dynamically allocate memory and save the returned address in color like this:
struct A var;
var.color = malloc(sizeof(char) * n);
Where n is the number of characters you want to allocate.
sizeof(char) here is superfluous since it's guaranteed to be 1.
However, I included it because if you wanted to, say, allocate an array of integers you would use:
malloc(sizeof(int) * n)
sizeof(int) is not always the same value, it depends on your architecture.
Also, in all cases you need to keep track of the size of your allocated memory yourself. There isn't a standard function that will tell you how big a buffer is by simply passing a pointer.
Note that malloc can return NULL (a pointer that you should never dereference) in case something went wrong, so you need to check the return value of malloc before using it).
When you're done with the memory, you must free the allocated memory like this:
free(var.color);
// do not use the value of var.color after this
Don't use value of var.color after passing it to free, otherwise the behaviour is undefined (use-after-free).
If you don't free your memory you may risk a memory leak.
Following up on my comment to the OP, and assuming the number and names of the acceptable colors are known in advance, here's an example where I used enum in conjunction with typedef to define a type that lists all the possible colors allowed by the program, so that the user can refer to each color by its name in the rest of the code.
#include <stdio.h>
typedef enum{
RED = 0,
GREEN = 1,
BLUE = 2
} Colors;
struct A {
int width;
int height;
int length;
char name[50];
Colors color;
};
int main(void){
struct A a = { 10, 20, 30, "Hello", RED };
printf("%d\n",BLUE+GREEN);
}
Needless to say, other colors can be added to the enum definition.
It's also worth noting that enum associates an integer to each item; arithmetics becomes possible, as in BLUE + GREEN, which yields 3 in the code sample above.
You can have color field as a pointer to char and create a enum whose elements indicate the colours and use them as designated initialiser in an array of strings which will have the color names. The enum elements can be used as index in color name array to get the appropriate color name and which can be assigned to structure color field, like this:
#include <stdio.h>
enum colors {
WHITE = 0,
BLACK,
RED,
GREEN,
BLUE,
MAX_COLOR
};
char * color_names[MAX_COLOR + 1] = {
[WHITE] = "White",
[BLACK] = "Black",
[RED] = "Red",
[GREEN] = "Green",
[BLUE] = "Blue",
[MAX_COLOR] = NULL
};
struct A {
int width;
int height;
int length;
char name[50];
char * color;
};
int main (void) {
struct A a = { 10, 20, 30, "Hello", color_names[RED] };
printf ("a.color : %s\n", a.color);
return 0;
}
Output:
# ./a.out
a.color : Red
Related
Here is my problem, I try to initialize constant values from a struct, for simple values I do like this: *(int*)&myStruct->myValue = 1; and it works very well but for the array I would have liked to use a similar method more than a 'memcpy' so I did like this:
*(MyOtherStruct*)&myStruct->myArrayOfStructs = {
otherStruct1, otherStruct2,
otherStruct3, otherStruct4
};
But I get this: error: expected expression before ‘{’ token
And I tried a lot of things but either it was totally buggy, or I had other error messages, I can't find the expression that the compiler wants and that works correctly...
Afterwards maybe the use of 'memcpy' is "obligated" but I will find it better without for my code if possible.
Thanks in advance !
EDIT: Here is an abstract but "working" example of what I want to do.
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
int r, g, b, a;
} Color;
typedef struct {
const int value;
const Color color[4];
} structExample;
int main(void)
{
Color colorWhite = { 0, 0, 0, 255 };
Color colorBlack = { 255, 255, 255, 255 };
Color colorRed = { 255, 0, 0, 255 };
Color colorBlue = { 0, 0, 255, 255 };
structExample* myStruct = malloc(sizeof(structExample));
*(int*)&myStruct->value = 1;
*(Color*)&myStruct->color = {
colorWhite, colorBlack,
colorRed, colorBlue
};
return 0;
}
You cannot assign an array, nor multiple elements of an array with one assignment. You can assign the elements of the array, for which you ought to do the casting correctly:
myStruct->color is an array of 4 Color. Taking its address yields a Color (*)4. Casting that to Color * leads to technical violations of rules required for the behavior to be define by the C standard.
Your goal is to remove const from the element. So simply take the address of an element instead of taking the address of the array:
* (Color *) &myStruct->color[0] = colorWhite;
* (Color *) &myStruct->color[1] = colorBlack;
* (Color *) &myStruct->color[2] = colorRed;
* (Color *) &myStruct->color[3] = colorBlue;
However, this casting away of const makes it irksome to avoid violating rules of the C standard regarding defined behavior. A better approach is:
Remove the const from the member declarations in structExample.
Allocate memory and initialize the structure with no const involved.
Assign the pointer to the memory to a new pointer that does have const.
When you do this, you can also use a compound literal to initialize the structure (even though it contains an array). Here is an example:
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct
{
int r, g, b, a;
} Color;
typedef struct
{
int value;
Color color[4];
} structExample;
int main(void)
{
Color colorWhite = { 0, 0, 0, 255 };
Color colorBlack = { 255, 255, 255, 255 };
Color colorRed = { 255, 0, 0, 255 };
Color colorBlue = { 0, 0, 255, 255 };
// Start with pointer to non-const object.
structExample *myStruct = malloc(sizeof *myStruct);
// Assign initial value.
*myStruct =
(structExample) { 1, { colorWhite, colorBlack, colorRed, colorBlue } };
// Convert to pointer to const object.
const structExample *myStructConst = myStruct;
// Use pointer-to-const for further work.
extern void foo(const structExample *);
foo(myStructConst);
/* Inside foo, only the pointer-to-const is seen, so it will get a
diagnostic message if it attempts to modify the structure without
using an explicit cast. foo does not see the original myStruct
pointer.
*/
// Use the original pointer to free.
free(myStruct);
}
You cant assign the arrays. You need to do this manually
myStruct->myArrayOfStructs[0] = otherStruct1;
myStruct->myArrayOfStructs[1] = otherStruct2;
myStruct->myArrayOfStructs[2] = otherStruct3;
myStruct->myArrayOfStructs[3] = otherStruct4;
Context:
I am experimenting with functional programming patterns in C90.
Goal:
This is what I'm trying to achieve in ISO C90:
struct mut_arr tmp = {0};
/* ... */
struct arr const res_c99 = {tmp};
Initializing a const struct member of type struct mut_arr with a lvalue (tmp).
#include <stdio.h>
enum
{
MUT_ARR_LEN = 4UL
};
struct mut_arr
{
unsigned char bytes[sizeof(unsigned char const) * MUT_ARR_LEN];
};
struct arr {
struct mut_arr const byte_arr;
};
static struct arr map(struct arr const* const a,
unsigned char (*const op)(unsigned char const))
{
struct mut_arr tmp = {0};
size_t i = 0UL;
for (; i < sizeof(tmp.bytes); ++i) {
tmp.bytes[i] = op(a->byte_arr.bytes[i]);
}
struct arr const res_c99 = {tmp};
return res_c99;
}
static unsigned char op_add_one(unsigned char const el)
{
return el + 1;
}
static unsigned char op_print(unsigned char const el)
{
printf("%u", el);
return 0U;
}
int main() {
struct arr const a1 = {{{1, 2, 3, 4}}};
struct arr const a2 = map(&a1, &op_add_one);
map(&a2, &op_print);
return 0;
}
This is what I tried in C90:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
enum {
MUT_ARR_LEN = 4UL
};
struct mut_arr {
unsigned char bytes[sizeof(unsigned char const) * MUT_ARR_LEN];
};
struct arr {
struct mut_arr const byte_arr;
};
struct arr map(struct arr const* const a,
unsigned char (*const op)(unsigned char const))
{
struct arr const res = {0};
unsigned char(*const res_mut_view)[sizeof(res.byte_arr.bytes)] =
(unsigned char(*const)[sizeof(res.byte_arr.bytes)]) & res;
struct mut_arr tmp = {0};
size_t i = 0UL;
for (; i < sizeof(tmp.bytes); ++i) {
tmp.bytes[i] = op(a->byte_arr.bytes[i]);
}
memcpy(res_mut_view, &tmp.bytes[0], sizeof(tmp.bytes));
return res;
}
unsigned char op_add_one(unsigned char const el) { return el + 1; }
unsigned char op_print(unsigned char const el) {
printf("%u", el);
return 0U;
}
int main() {
struct arr const a1 = {{{1, 2, 3, 4}}};
struct arr const a2 = map(&a1, &op_add_one);
map(&a2, &op_print);
return 0;
}
All I do is to create an "alternate view" (making it essentially writable). Hence, I cast the returned address to unsigned char(*const)[sizeof(res.byte_arr.bytes)].
Then, I use memcpy, and copy the contents of the tmp to res.
I also tried to use the scoping mechanism to circumvent initializing in the beginning.
But it does not help, since there cannot be a runtime evaluation.
This works, but it is not anything like the C99 solution above.
Is there perhaps a more elegant way to pull this off?
PS: Preferably, the solution should be as portable as possible, too. (No heap allocations, only static allocations. It should remain thread-safe. These programs above seem to be, as I only use stack allocation.)
Union it.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
enum {
MUT_ARR_LEN = 4UL
};
struct mut_arr {
unsigned char bytes[sizeof(unsigned char) * MUT_ARR_LEN];
};
struct arr {
const struct mut_arr byte_arr;
};
struct arr map(const struct arr *a, unsigned char (*op)(unsigned char)) {
union {
struct mut_arr tmp;
struct arr arr;
} u;
size_t i = 0;
for (; i < sizeof(u.tmp.bytes); ++i) {
u.tmp.bytes[i] = op(a->byte_arr.bytes[i]);
}
return u.arr;
}
unsigned char op_add_one(unsigned char el) {
return el + 1;
}
unsigned char op_print(unsigned char el) {
printf("%u", el);
return 0U;
}
int main() {
const struct arr a1 = {{{1, 2, 3, 4}}};
const struct arr a2 = map(&a1, &op_add_one);
map(&a2, &op_print);
return 0;
}
Let's throw some standard stuffs from https://port70.net/~nsz/c/c89/c89-draft.html .
One special guarantee is made in order to simplify the use of unions: If a union contains several structures that share a common initial sequence, and if the union object currently contains one of these structures, it is permitted to inspect the common initial part of any of them. Two structures share a common initial sequence if corresponding members have compatible types for a sequence of one or more initial members.
Two types have compatible type if their types are the same.
For two qualified types to be compatible, both shall have the identically qualified version of a compatible type;
The idea is that "common initial sequence" of mut_arr and arr is unsigned char [sizeof(unsigned char) * MUT_ARR_LEN]; so you can access one using the other.
However, as I read it now, it is unspecified if "initial sequence if corresponding members" includes nested struct members or not. So technically to be super standard compliant, you would:
struct arr map(const struct arr *a, unsigned char (*op)(unsigned char)) {
struct mutmut_arr {
struct mut_arr byte_arr;
};
union {
struct mutmut_arr tmp;
struct arr arr;
} u;
size_t i = 0;
for (; i < sizeof(u.tmp.bytes); ++i) {
u.tmp.byte_arr.bytes[i] = op(a->byte_arr.bytes[i]);
}
return u.arr;
}
#subjective I do want to note two things.
The placement of const type qualifier in your code is very confusing. It's typical in C to write const <type> not <type> const. It's typical to align * to the right with space on the left. I was not able to read your code efficiently at all. I removed almost all const from the code above.
Creating such interface as presented will be pain with no great benefits, with a lot of edge cases with lurking undefined behaviors around the corner. In C programming language, trust the programmer - it's one of the principles of C programming language. Do not prevent the programmer to do what has to be done (initializing a structure member). I would advise making the member mutable and have one structure definition and call it day. const qualified structure members usually are just hard to deal with, with no big benefits.
My answer might sound outrageous at first glance. It is
STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING, NOW!
I will take my time to explain and give you a glimpse into your future (which is dim, if you pursue this idea) and try to convince you. But the gist of my answer is the bold line above.
Your prototype omits crucial parts to have some lasting solution to your "functional programming in C" approach. For example, you only have arrays of bytes (unsigned char). But for a "real" solution for "real" programmers, you need to consider different types. If you go to hoogle (Haskells online type and function browser engine thingy), you will notice, that fmap, which is the functional feature you try to achieve in C is defined as:
fmap :: Functor f => (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
This means, the mapping is not always from type a to type a. It's a monadic thingy, you try to offer your C programming fellows. So, an array of type element type a needs to be mapped to an array of element type b. Hence, your solution needs to offer not just arrays of bytes.
In C, arrays can reside in different types of memory and we cannot hide this very well. (In real functional languages, memory management is kind of abstracted away for the larger part and you just do not care. But in C, you must care. The user of your library must care and you need to allow them to dutifully care. Arrays can be global, on the stack, on the heap, in shared memory, ... and you need to offer a solution, allowing all that. Else, it will always just be a toy, propagating an illusion, that "it is possible and useful".
So, with just allowing arrays of different, custom types (someone will want arrays of arrays of a type as well, mind you!) and to be aware of memory management, how could a header file of your next evolution look like. Here is what I came up with:
#ifndef __IMMUTABLE_ARRAY_H
#define __IMMUTABLE_ARRAY_H
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdatomic.h>
// lacking namespaces or similar facilities in C, we use
// the prefix IA (Immutable Array) in front of all the stuff
// declared in this header.
// Wherever you see a naked `int`, think "bool".
// 0 -> false, 1 -> true.
// We do not like stdbool.h because sometimes trouble
// ensues in mixed C/C++ code bases on some targets, where
// sizeof(C-bool) != sizeof(C++-bool) o.O. So we cannot use
// C-bool in headers...
// We need storage classes!
// There are arrays on heap, static (global arrays),
// automatic arrays (on stack, maybe by using alloca),
// arrays in shared memory, ....
// For those different locations, we need to be able to
// perform different actions, e.g. for cleanup.
// IAStorageClass_t defines the behavior for a specific
// storage class.
// There is also the case of an array of arrays to consider...
// where we would need to clean up each member of the array
// once the array goes out of scope.
struct IAArray_tag;
typedef struct IAArray_tag IAArray_t;
typedef struct IAStorageClass_tag IAStorageClass_t;
typedef int (*IAArrayAllocator) (IAStorageClass_t* sclass,
size_t elementSize,
size_t capacity,
void* maybeStorage,
IAArray_t* target);
typedef void (*IAArrayDeleter) (IAArray_t* arr);
typedef void (*IAArrayElementDeleter) (IAArray_t* arr);
typedef int64_t (*IAArrayAddRef) (IAArray_t* arr);
typedef int64_t (*IAArrayRelease) (IAArray_t* arr);
typedef struct IAStorageClass_tag {
IAArrayAllocator allocator;
IAArrayDeleter deleter;
IAArrayElementDeleter elementDeleter;
IAArrayAddRef addReffer;
IAArrayRelease releaser;
} IAStorageClass_t;
enum IAStorageClassID_tag {
IA_HEAP_ARRAY = 0,
IA_STACK_ARRAY = 1,
IA_GLOBAL_ARRAY = 2,
IA_CUSTOM_CLASSES_BEGIN = 100
};
typedef enum IAStorageClassID_tag IAStorageClassID_t;
// creates the default storage classes (for heap and automatic).
void IAInitialize();
void IATerminate();
// returns a custom and dedicated identifier of the storage class.
int32_t
IARegisterStorageClass
(IAArrayAllocator allocator,
IAArrayDeleter deleter,
IAArrayElementDeleter elementDeleter,
IAArrayAddRef addReffer,
IAArrayRelease releaser);
struct IAArray_tag {
const IAStorageClass_t* storageClass;
int64_t refCount;
size_t elementSize; // Depends on the type you want to store
size_t capacity;
size_t length;
void* data;
};
// to make sure, uninitialized array variables are properly
// initialized to a harmless state.
IAArray_t IAInitInstance();
// allows to check if we ran into some uninitialized instance.
// In C++, this would be like after default constructor.
// See IAInitInstance().
int IAIsArray(IAArray_t* arr);
int
IAArrayCreate
(int32_t storageClassID,
size_t elementSize, // the elementSize SHALL be padded to
// a system-acceptable alignment size.
size_t capacity,
size_t size,
void* maybeStorage,
IAArray_t* target);
typedef
int
(*IAInitializerWithIndex_t)
(size_t index,
void* elementPtr);
int
IAArrayCreateWithInitializer
(int32_t storageClassID,
size_t elementSize,
size_t capacity,
void* maybeStorage,
IAInitializerWithIndex_t initializer,
IAArray_t* target);
IAArray_t* IAArrayAddReference(IAArray_t* arr);
void IAArrayReleaseReference(IAArray_t* arr);
// The one and only legal way to access elements within the array.
// Shortcutters, clever guys and other violators get hung, drawn
// and quartered!
const void * const IAArrayAccess(IAArray_t* arr, size_t index);
typedef void (*IAValueMapping_t)
(size_t index,
void* sourceElementPtr,
size_t sourceElementSize,
void* targetElementPtr,
size_t targetElementSize);
size_t IAArraySize(IAArray_t* arr);
size_t IAArrayCapacity(IAArray_t* arr);
size_t IAArrayElementSize(IAArray_t* arr);
// Because of reasons, we sometimes want to recycle
// an array and populate it with new values.
// This can only be referentially transparent and safe,
// if there are no other references to this array stored
// anywhere. i.e. if refcount == 1.
// If our app code passed the array around to other functions,
// some nasty ones might sneakily store themselves a pointer
// to an array and then the refcount > 1 and we cannot
// safely recycle the array instance.
// Then, we have to release it and create ourselves a new one.
int IACanRecycleArray(IAArray_t* arr);
// Starship troopers reporter during human invasion
// of bug homeworld: "It is an ugly planet, a bug planet!"
// This is how we feel about C. Map needs some noisy extras,
// just because C does not allow to build new abstractions with
// types. Yes, we could send Erich Gamma our regards and pack
// all the noise into some IAArrayFactory * :)
int
IAArrayMap(IAValueMapping_t mapping,
IAArray_t* source,
int32_t targetStorageClassID,
size_t targetElementSize,
void* maybeTargetStorage,
IAArray_t* target);
#endif
Needless to say, that I did not bother to implement my cute immutable-array.h in my still empty immutable-array.c, yes?
But once we did it, the joy woulds begin and we could write robust, functional C programs, yes? No! This is how well written functional C application code using those arrays might look like:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdatomic.h>
#include <math.h>
#include <assert.h>
#include "immutable-array.h"
typedef struct F64FloorResult_tag {
double div;
double rem;
} F64FloorResult_t;
void myFloor(double number, F64FloorResult_t* result) {
if (NULL != result) {
result->div = floor(number);
result->rem = number - result->div;
}
}
int randomDoubleInitializer(size_t index, double* element) {
if (NULL != element) {
*element = ((double)rand()) / (double)RAND_MAX;
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
void
doubleToF64FloorMapping
(size_t index,
double* input,
size_t inputElementSize,
F64FloorResult_t *output,
size_t outputElementSize) {
assert(sizeof(double) == inputElementSize);
assert(sizeof(F64FloorResult_t) == outputElementSize);
assert(NULL != input);
assert(NULL != output);
myFloor(*input, output);
}
int main(int argc, const char* argv[]) {
IAInitialize();
{
double sourceData[20];
IAArray_t source = IAInitInstance();
if (IAArrayCreateWithInitializer
((IAStorageClassID_t)IA_STACK_ARRAY,
sizeof(double),
20,
&sourceData[0],
(IAInitializerWithIndex_t)randomDoubleInitializer,
&source)) {
IAArray_t result = IAInitInstance();
F64FloorResult_t resultData[20];
if (IAArrayMap
((IAValueMapping_t)doubleToF64FloorMapping,
&source,
(int32_t)IA_STACK_ARRAY,
sizeof(F64FloorResult_t),
&result)) {
assert(IAArraySize(&source) == IAArraySize(&result));
for (size_t index = 0;
index < IAArraySize(&source);
index++) {
const double* const ival =
(const double* const)IAArrayAccess(&source, index);
const F64FloorResult_t* const oval =
(const F64FloorResult_t* const)
IAArrayAccess(&result,index);
printf("(%g . #S(f64floorresult_t :div %g :rem %g))\n",
*ival, oval->div, oval->rem);
}
IAArrayReleaseReference(&result);
}
IAArrayReleaseReference(&source);
}
}
IATerminate();
return 0;
}
I see already the knives coming out of the satchels of your colleagues if you try to impose such a monstrosity upon them. They will hate you, you will hate yourself. Eventually, you will hate that you ever had the idea to even try.
Especially, if in a more suitable language, the same code might look like this:
(map 'list #'(lambda (x) (multiple-value-list (floor x)))
(loop repeat 20
for x = (random 1.0)
collecting x))
I have an array of structures as a function parameter and the size of the array is dynamic. My coworker said that I'll have to use a double pointer since the values contained in the array of struct will be overwritten.
The parameter that will become a double pointer is the following :
xPIDConfig_t **pxPIDConfig
Here is what the structure looks like for the xPIDConfig_t :
typedef struct
{
ePIDType_t ePIDType;
/* Common fields for the different types of PID */
float fLowerSaturationLimit;
float fUpperSaturationLimit;
float fOldInput;
float fIError;
uint32_t ulDeltaTime;
eBool_t bSaturationEnable;
eBool_t bAntiWindupEnable;
eBool_t bNegativeErrorEmptyIError;
union
{
/* Parallel PID fields */
struct
{
float fProportionalGain;
float fIntegralGain;
float fDerivativeGain;
}xParallelPID;
/* Non-interactive PID fields */
struct
{
float fControllerGain;
uint32_t ulIntegralTime;
uint32_t ulDerivativeTime;
}xNonInteractivePID;
}xUniqueFields;
}xPIDConfig_t;
The size of the array of pxPIDConfig will vary.
But I am not sure how to malloc that double pointer or even how to use the function containing the double pointer.
I was just wondering if anyone had a good example of code of how to use a function with a double pointer array of variating size? and how to properly change the values contained in the array itself inside a function?
Right now this is how I change the values within the function :
pxPIDConfig->ePIDType = ePIDType;
pxPIDConfig->fOldInput = 0;
pxPIDConfig->fIError = 0;
pxPIDConfig->ulDeltaTime = ulDeltaTime;
pxPIDConfig->bSaturationEnable = bIsSaturationEnable;
pxPIDConfig->bAntiWindupEnable = bIsAntiWindupEnable;
pxPIDConfig->bNegativeErrorEmptyIError = bNegativeErrorEmptyIError;
when the pointer is double do I have to use double '->'? This is very confusing for me.
Thank you all for the help
/***************** EDIT ************************************
My function is working right now, but I got told I need to use memory allocation since the size of my arrays varies according to the number of loops I want to implement.
Here are the parameters of my function :
eError_t eControlCascadeInit( uint8_t ucNumberOfLoops, ePIDType_t *pePIDType, xPIDConfig_t **pxPIDConfig, float *pfLowerLimit, float *pfUpperLimit, uint32_t *pulDeltaTime, \
eBool_t *pbIsSaturationEnable, eBool_t *pbIsAntiWindupEnable, eBool_t *pbNegativeErrorEmptyIError, \
float *pfPGain, float *pfIGain, float *pfDGain, float *pfCGain, uint32_t *pulITime, uint32_t *pulDTime )
They're all arrays of size ucNumberOfLoops. All of them are read-only arrays, except for the pxPIDConfig one that is write-only. The function initializes all the xPIDConfig_t present in the array with the parameters passed to the function through array.
array[ 0 ] contains the parameters for the first PID controller being initialized.
array[ 1 ] contains the parameters for the second PID controller being initialized and so on...
It's like that for all the parameters in the function.
Hope it makes my question more clear?
Here you have an example of how to use double-pointer, to change the pointer in the function:
void allocate(xPIDConfig_t **array, size_t size)
{
*array = malloc(sizeof(**array) * size);
/* some examples how to access the struct members vi double pointer -*
(*array) -> ulDeltaTime = 100;
(**array).ulDeltaTime = 100;
(*(array + 5)) -> ulDeltaTime = 100;
array[5] -> ulDeltaTime = 100;
(*array[5]).ulDeltaTime = 100;
}
int main(void)
{
xPIDConfig_t *array;
allocate(&array, 100);
printf("%s\n", array ? "success" : "failure");
free(array);
}
You would only need a double pointer if the function reallocates the array to a different size. If the size isn't changing, you can just pass a pointer to (usually the first) element of the array, along with any size or index required by the function. For example:
extern void frobPidConfig(xPIDConfig_t *);
// 'frob' the xPIDConfig_t array elements from index a to b
void frobSomePidConfigs(xPIDConfig_t *pidconfigs, unsigned int a, unsigned int b)
{
unsigned int i;
for (i = a; i <= b; i++)
{
frobPidConfig(&pidConfigs[i]);
// Example of member access:
pidConfigs[i].ulDeltaTime = 42;
}
}
Example of calling code:
xPIDConfig_t *pidConfigs;
unsigned int n = 10; // or whatever...
pidConfigs = calloc(sizeof *pidConfigs, n);
if (!pidConfigs)
{
// Allocation error
exit(1);
}
/* ... */
frobSomePidConfigs(pidConfigs, 2, 5);
On the other hand, if the function needs to reallocate the array and initialize any new elements, it could be done using a double pointer like this:
extern void initPidConfig(xPIDConfig_t *);
void reallocPidConfigs(xPIDConfig_t **pidConfigs, unsigned int oldSize, unsigned int newSize)
{
unsigned int i;
// Reallocate to new size
xPIDConfig_t *realloced = realloc(*pidConfigs, sizeof **pidConfigs * newSize);
if (newSize && !realloced)
{
// allocation error
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
*pidConfigs = realloced;
// Initialize any additional elements
for (i = oldSize; i < newSize; i++)
{
initPidConfig(*pidConfigs + i); // or: initPidConfig(&(*pidConfigs)[i]);
// Examples of member access:
(*pidConfigs)[i].bSaturationEnable = true;
(*pidConfigs + i)->bAntiWindupEnable = true;
}
}
Example of calling code:
xPIDConfig_t *pidConfigs = NULL;
// Note: realloc of the NULL pointer in *pidConfigs is OK.
reallocPidConfigs(&pidConfigs, 0, 10);
frobSomePidConfigs(pidConfigs, 2, 5);
Limited to addressing assumptions and questions regarding your title question:
"How to use double pointers (pointer to pointer) for an array of structures properly in standard C"
First, just because the function argument might have a double pointer (i.e. xPIDConfig_t **pxPIDConfig) does not mean that the variable need to be allocated memory with a double pointer, i.e. if the function eg is called like this: funcChangeParam(&pxPIDConfig); this often means that the object being passed needs to be changed in some way, requiring that the address of be passed, not the object itself. Also, if the object itself is a pointer, (such as a pointer to several instances of a struct object.) then the function used to pass the object for modification will be prototyped with arguments such as void funcChangeParam(xPIDConfig_t **pxPIDConfig); (Note the double pointer here.)
So with this function prototype Making the allocation of memory look like this:
void funcChangeParam(xPIDConfig_t **pxPIDConfig);
//allocate memory for multiple instances of struct
xPIDConfig_t *pxPIDConfig = malloc(countOfInstances * sizeof(*pxPIDConfig);
if(pxPIDConfig)
{
//use pxPIDConfig
funcChangeParam(&pxPIDConfig);pass pointer to multiple instances of struct
And references to the object members inside the calling function could use the following notation. Eg:
//in a loop or other construct where i is defined from 0 to countOfInstances - 1
(*pxPIDConfig)[i].ePIDType = ePIDType;//modification of assignment per your example
//etc.
//The following is a trivial example for illustration purposes.
//Code here uses a simplified struct, function
//prototype, and simple calling example, the concept
//of which easily translates to what you are
//asking about.
typedef struct {
int num;
}test_s;
void change(test_s **new);
int main(){
test_s *test = malloc(10*sizeof *test);
change(&test);
return 0;
}
void change(test_s **new)
{
for(int i=0;i<10;i++)
{
(*new)[i].num = (i+1)*3; //init all instances to some value
}
}
I have a structure which looks like -
struct stack{
int top;
char string[size][80];
}stackV;
I want to give user an option to allocate size of char string array at runtime.
I had used scanf function to do this -
I tried to achive it by doing -
int size=0;
struct stack{
int top;
char string[size][80];
} stackV;
But by doing this i got warning which says - variably modified 'string' at file scope
Is there any way by which we can assign size to a structure member array .
I can't create a structure inside any function because the structure member is used by other functions also.
You can use a flexible array member to achieve what you need:
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>
typedef struct
{
int top;
char string[][80];
} stackv;
int main()
{
size_t strings = 3;
stackv* s = malloc(sizeof(stackv) + strings*80);
strcpy(s->string[0], "test");
strcpy(s->string[1], "hello");
strcpy(s->string[2], "world");
for(size_t i=0; i<strings; i++)
{
puts(s->string[i]);
}
free(s);
return 0;
}
The declaration of char string[][80]; tells the compiler that there will be an unknown amount of char [80] arrays at the end of the struct.
The sizeof(stackv) will therefore only give the size of all other members except the last one (in this case an integer).
You don't know how many elements will be in your stack.
Only the user gives you the "size" in the runtime; so you can't allocate an array statically (compilation time), but allocate it dynamically (run time) when getting the size from the user.
You are getting an "warning" because you define "size" from size "0" then you try to declare an array of this size and according to the spec there is no array of size 0 as I understand):
ISO 9899:2011 6.7.6.2:
If the expression is a constant expression, it shall have a value greater than zero.
How to allocate the array dynamically as a struct which contains "size" elements and each element is a string of 80 chars?
#define STR_LEN 80
struct stack {
int top;
char *string;
} stackv;
enum {
SUCCESS = 0,
FAILURE,
};
int InitStack(stackv *stackv, int size) {
if (size <= 0)
return FAILURE;
stackv->string = (char *)malloc(size*sizeof(char)*80);
if (stackv->string == NULL)
return FAILURE;
stackv->top = 0;
return SUCCESS;
}
In the main function, you declare the variable "stackv" and pass it by reference (pointer) to the initialization function which I wrote.
This code compiles correctly for me:
int size = 10;
typedef struct
{
int top;
char string[size][80];
} stackv;
I'm using:
$ gcc --version
gcc (Debian 5.4.1-3) 5.4.1 20161019
Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Does anyone know if there is a way to initialize a structure containing a variable length array without initializing the array first in a separate variable (and without using malloc)?
My structure looks like this:
struct my_struct {
int *values;
int size;
}
For now in my code I have that:
void my_function (int size) {
int values[size];
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = values,
.size = size
};
...
}
(Array is initialized first, then the structure. This is working but it looks awkward to declare a separate variable for the array.)
This would probably work as well:
void my_function (int size) {
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = calloc (size, sizeof (int)),
.size = size
};
...
}
(but I do not want to use mallocs)
But what I would like to write is something like:
void my_function (int size) {
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = (int[size]){},
.size = size
};
...
}
Any idea?
First of all, note that you cannot use an array from your stack if you want to return your structure.
int values[size];
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = values,
.size = size
};
return mystr;
This is not going to work since the lifetime of values ends when you return. The same applies if you try to store mystr in a value pointed by a parameter of your function.
Obviously you're not doing that, however I think it's worth to mention anyway.
Answer to your question: it depends on the situation.
Can you be sure that size is small? Or else your stack is going to overflow in int values[size]. Is it small and predictable? Stick with your first solution. If it can be large or dependent on user-input, definitely use malloc.
Are you in some way returning or retaining a persistent pointer to your structure or values? Use malloc (see my first remark).
Alternatively, you can also use the struct hack but then you would have to malloc the entire mystr anyway.
One more thing, you wrote:
(Array is initialized first, then the structure. This is working but
it looks awkward to declare a separate variable for the array.)
I'm not sure what you mean, but the int * is only sizeof(intptr_t), irregardless of the size of the array. So you're not allocating twice the memory for 1 array, if that's what you're thinking.
Initializer are unnamed objects initialized by the initializer list. Outside the body of a function, the object has static storage duration. So it is possible to use the address of such an object. With a little help from variadic macros you can try →
#include <stdio.h>
struct test {
int count;
int *values;
} test[] = {
#define init(...) { .count=sizeof( (int[]) {__VA_ARGS__} )/sizeof(int), .values=(int *)&(int []){__VA_ARGS__} }
init(0,1,2,3,4),
init(2,4,6,8),
init(1,3),
init(42)
};
#define test_size ((int) (sizeof test/sizeof *test))
int main(void)
{
for(int array=0; array<test_size; ++array) {
printf("array %d (%d) : [ ", array+1, test[array].count);
for(int i=0; i<test[array].count; ++i)
printf("%d ", test[array].values[i]);
puts("]");
}
return 0;
}