I understand that strings in C are just character arrays. So I tried the following code, but it gives strange results, such as garbage output or program crashes:
#include <stdio.h>
int main (void)
{
char str [5] = "hello";
puts(str);
}
Why doesn't this work?
It compiles cleanly with gcc -std=c17 -pedantic-errors -Wall -Wextra.
Note: This post is meant to be used as a canonical FAQ for problems stemming from a failure to allocate room for a NUL terminator when declaring a string.
A C string is a character array that ends with a null terminator.
All characters have a symbol table value. The null terminator is the symbol value 0 (zero). It is used to mark the end of a string. This is necessary since the size of the string isn't stored anywhere.
Therefore, every time you allocate room for a string, you must include sufficient space for the null terminator character. Your example does not do this, it only allocates room for the 5 characters of "hello". Correct code should be:
char str[6] = "hello";
Or equivalently, you can write self-documenting code for 5 characters plus 1 null terminator:
char str[5+1] = "hello";
But you can also use this and let the compiler do the counting and pick the size:
char str[] = "hello"; // Will allocate 6 bytes automatically
When allocating memory for a string dynamically in run-time, you also need to allocate room for the null terminator:
char input[n] = ... ;
...
char* str = malloc(strlen(input) + 1);
If you don't append a null terminator at the end of a string, then library functions expecting a string won't work properly and you will get "undefined behavior" bugs such as garbage output or program crashes.
The most common way to write a null terminator character in C is by using a so-called "octal escape sequence", looking like this: '\0'. This is 100% equivalent to writing 0, but the \ serves as self-documenting code to state that the zero is explicitly meant to be a null terminator. Code such as if(str[i] == '\0') will check if the specific character is the null terminator.
Please note that the term null terminator has nothing to do with null pointers or the NULL macro! This can be confusing - very similar names but very different meanings. This is why the null terminator is sometimes referred to as NUL with one L, not to be confused with NULL or null pointers. See answers to this SO question for further details.
The "hello" in your code is called a string literal. This is to be regarded as a read-only string. The "" syntax means that the compiler will append a null terminator in the end of the string literal automatically. So if you print out sizeof("hello") you will get 6, not 5, because you get the size of the array including a null terminator.
It compiles cleanly with gcc
Indeed, not even a warning. This is because of a subtle detail/flaw in the C language that allows character arrays to be initialized with a string literal that contains exactly as many characters as there is room in the array and then silently discard the null terminator (C17 6.7.9/15). The language is purposely behaving like this for historical reasons, see Inconsistent gcc diagnostic for string initialization for details. Also note that C++ is different here and does not allow this trick/flaw to be used.
From the C Standard (7.1.1 Definitions of terms)
1 A string is a contiguous sequence of characters terminated by and
including the first null character. The term multibyte string is
sometimes used instead to emphasize special processing given to
multibyte characters contained in the string or to avoid confusion
with a wide string. A pointer to a string is a pointer to its initial
(lowest addressed) character. The length of a string is the number of
bytes preceding the null character and the value of a string is the
sequence of the values of the contained characters, in order.
In this declaration
char str [5] = "hello";
the string literal "hello" has the internal representation like
{ 'h', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o', '\0' }
so it has 6 characters including the terminating zero. Its elements are used to initialize the character array str which reserve space only for 5 characters.
The C Standard (opposite to the C++ Standard) allows such an initialization of a character array when the terminating zero of a string literal is not used as an initializer.
However as a result the character array str does not contain a string.
If you want that the array would contain a string you could write
char str [6] = "hello";
or just
char str [] = "hello";
In the last case the size of the character array is determined from the number of initializers of the string literal that is equal to 6.
Can all strings be considered an array of characters (Yes), can all character arrays be considered strings (No).
Why Not? and Why does it matter?
In addition to the other answers explaining that the length of a string is not stored anywhere as part of the string and the references to the standard where a string is defined, the flip-side is "How do the C library functions handle strings?"
While a character array can hold the same characters, it is simply an array of characters unless the last character is followed by the nul-terminating character. That nul-terminating character is what allows the array of characters to be considered (handled as) a string.
All functions in C that expect a string as an argument expect the sequence of characters to be nul-terminated. Why?
It has to do with the way all string functions work. Since the length isn't included as part of an array, string-functions, scan forward in the array until the nul-character (e.g. '\0' -- equivalent to decimal 0) is found. See ASCII Table and Description. Regardless whether you are using strcpy, strchr, strcspn, etc.. All string functions rely on the nul-terminating character being present to define where the end of that string is.
A comparison of two similar functions from string.h will emphasize the importance of the nul-terminating character. Take for example:
char *strcpy(char *dest, const char *src);
The strcpy function simply copies bytes from src to dest until the nul-terminating character is found telling strcpy where to stop copying characters. Now take the similar function memcpy:
void *memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, size_t n);
The function performs a similar operation, but does not consider or require the src parameter to be a string. Since memcpy cannot simply scan forward in src copying bytes to dest until a nul-terminating character is reached, it requires an explicit number of bytes to copy as a third parameter. This third parameter provides memcpy with the same size information strcpy is able to derive simply by scanning forward until a nul-terminating character is found.
(which also emphasizes what goes wrong in strcpy (or any function expecting a string) if you fail to provide the function with a nul-terminated string -- it has no idea where to stop and will happily race off across the rest of your memory segment invoking Undefined Behavior until a nul-character just happens to be found somewhere in memory -- or a Segmentation Fault occurs)
That is why functions expecting a nul-terminated string must be passed a nul-terminated string and why it matters.
Intuitively...
Think of an array as a variable (holds things) and a string as a value (can be placed in a variable).
They are certainly not the same thing. In your case the variable is too small to hold the string, so the string gets cut off. ("quoted strings" in C have an implicit null character at the end.)
However it's possible to store a string in an array that is much larger than the string.
Note that the usual assignment and comparison operators (= == < etc.) don't work as you might expect. But the strxyz family of functions comes pretty close, once you know what you're doing. See the C FAQ on strings and arrays.
Related
I understand that strings in C are just character arrays. So I tried the following code, but it gives strange results, such as garbage output or program crashes:
#include <stdio.h>
int main (void)
{
char str [5] = "hello";
puts(str);
}
Why doesn't this work?
It compiles cleanly with gcc -std=c17 -pedantic-errors -Wall -Wextra.
Note: This post is meant to be used as a canonical FAQ for problems stemming from a failure to allocate room for a NUL terminator when declaring a string.
A C string is a character array that ends with a null terminator.
All characters have a symbol table value. The null terminator is the symbol value 0 (zero). It is used to mark the end of a string. This is necessary since the size of the string isn't stored anywhere.
Therefore, every time you allocate room for a string, you must include sufficient space for the null terminator character. Your example does not do this, it only allocates room for the 5 characters of "hello". Correct code should be:
char str[6] = "hello";
Or equivalently, you can write self-documenting code for 5 characters plus 1 null terminator:
char str[5+1] = "hello";
But you can also use this and let the compiler do the counting and pick the size:
char str[] = "hello"; // Will allocate 6 bytes automatically
When allocating memory for a string dynamically in run-time, you also need to allocate room for the null terminator:
char input[n] = ... ;
...
char* str = malloc(strlen(input) + 1);
If you don't append a null terminator at the end of a string, then library functions expecting a string won't work properly and you will get "undefined behavior" bugs such as garbage output or program crashes.
The most common way to write a null terminator character in C is by using a so-called "octal escape sequence", looking like this: '\0'. This is 100% equivalent to writing 0, but the \ serves as self-documenting code to state that the zero is explicitly meant to be a null terminator. Code such as if(str[i] == '\0') will check if the specific character is the null terminator.
Please note that the term null terminator has nothing to do with null pointers or the NULL macro! This can be confusing - very similar names but very different meanings. This is why the null terminator is sometimes referred to as NUL with one L, not to be confused with NULL or null pointers. See answers to this SO question for further details.
The "hello" in your code is called a string literal. This is to be regarded as a read-only string. The "" syntax means that the compiler will append a null terminator in the end of the string literal automatically. So if you print out sizeof("hello") you will get 6, not 5, because you get the size of the array including a null terminator.
It compiles cleanly with gcc
Indeed, not even a warning. This is because of a subtle detail/flaw in the C language that allows character arrays to be initialized with a string literal that contains exactly as many characters as there is room in the array and then silently discard the null terminator (C17 6.7.9/15). The language is purposely behaving like this for historical reasons, see Inconsistent gcc diagnostic for string initialization for details. Also note that C++ is different here and does not allow this trick/flaw to be used.
From the C Standard (7.1.1 Definitions of terms)
1 A string is a contiguous sequence of characters terminated by and
including the first null character. The term multibyte string is
sometimes used instead to emphasize special processing given to
multibyte characters contained in the string or to avoid confusion
with a wide string. A pointer to a string is a pointer to its initial
(lowest addressed) character. The length of a string is the number of
bytes preceding the null character and the value of a string is the
sequence of the values of the contained characters, in order.
In this declaration
char str [5] = "hello";
the string literal "hello" has the internal representation like
{ 'h', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o', '\0' }
so it has 6 characters including the terminating zero. Its elements are used to initialize the character array str which reserve space only for 5 characters.
The C Standard (opposite to the C++ Standard) allows such an initialization of a character array when the terminating zero of a string literal is not used as an initializer.
However as a result the character array str does not contain a string.
If you want that the array would contain a string you could write
char str [6] = "hello";
or just
char str [] = "hello";
In the last case the size of the character array is determined from the number of initializers of the string literal that is equal to 6.
Can all strings be considered an array of characters (Yes), can all character arrays be considered strings (No).
Why Not? and Why does it matter?
In addition to the other answers explaining that the length of a string is not stored anywhere as part of the string and the references to the standard where a string is defined, the flip-side is "How do the C library functions handle strings?"
While a character array can hold the same characters, it is simply an array of characters unless the last character is followed by the nul-terminating character. That nul-terminating character is what allows the array of characters to be considered (handled as) a string.
All functions in C that expect a string as an argument expect the sequence of characters to be nul-terminated. Why?
It has to do with the way all string functions work. Since the length isn't included as part of an array, string-functions, scan forward in the array until the nul-character (e.g. '\0' -- equivalent to decimal 0) is found. See ASCII Table and Description. Regardless whether you are using strcpy, strchr, strcspn, etc.. All string functions rely on the nul-terminating character being present to define where the end of that string is.
A comparison of two similar functions from string.h will emphasize the importance of the nul-terminating character. Take for example:
char *strcpy(char *dest, const char *src);
The strcpy function simply copies bytes from src to dest until the nul-terminating character is found telling strcpy where to stop copying characters. Now take the similar function memcpy:
void *memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, size_t n);
The function performs a similar operation, but does not consider or require the src parameter to be a string. Since memcpy cannot simply scan forward in src copying bytes to dest until a nul-terminating character is reached, it requires an explicit number of bytes to copy as a third parameter. This third parameter provides memcpy with the same size information strcpy is able to derive simply by scanning forward until a nul-terminating character is found.
(which also emphasizes what goes wrong in strcpy (or any function expecting a string) if you fail to provide the function with a nul-terminated string -- it has no idea where to stop and will happily race off across the rest of your memory segment invoking Undefined Behavior until a nul-character just happens to be found somewhere in memory -- or a Segmentation Fault occurs)
That is why functions expecting a nul-terminated string must be passed a nul-terminated string and why it matters.
Intuitively...
Think of an array as a variable (holds things) and a string as a value (can be placed in a variable).
They are certainly not the same thing. In your case the variable is too small to hold the string, so the string gets cut off. ("quoted strings" in C have an implicit null character at the end.)
However it's possible to store a string in an array that is much larger than the string.
Note that the usual assignment and comparison operators (= == < etc.) don't work as you might expect. But the strxyz family of functions comes pretty close, once you know what you're doing. See the C FAQ on strings and arrays.
I understand that strings in C are just character arrays. So I tried the following code, but it gives strange results, such as garbage output or program crashes:
#include <stdio.h>
int main (void)
{
char str [5] = "hello";
puts(str);
}
Why doesn't this work?
It compiles cleanly with gcc -std=c17 -pedantic-errors -Wall -Wextra.
Note: This post is meant to be used as a canonical FAQ for problems stemming from a failure to allocate room for a NUL terminator when declaring a string.
A C string is a character array that ends with a null terminator.
All characters have a symbol table value. The null terminator is the symbol value 0 (zero). It is used to mark the end of a string. This is necessary since the size of the string isn't stored anywhere.
Therefore, every time you allocate room for a string, you must include sufficient space for the null terminator character. Your example does not do this, it only allocates room for the 5 characters of "hello". Correct code should be:
char str[6] = "hello";
Or equivalently, you can write self-documenting code for 5 characters plus 1 null terminator:
char str[5+1] = "hello";
But you can also use this and let the compiler do the counting and pick the size:
char str[] = "hello"; // Will allocate 6 bytes automatically
When allocating memory for a string dynamically in run-time, you also need to allocate room for the null terminator:
char input[n] = ... ;
...
char* str = malloc(strlen(input) + 1);
If you don't append a null terminator at the end of a string, then library functions expecting a string won't work properly and you will get "undefined behavior" bugs such as garbage output or program crashes.
The most common way to write a null terminator character in C is by using a so-called "octal escape sequence", looking like this: '\0'. This is 100% equivalent to writing 0, but the \ serves as self-documenting code to state that the zero is explicitly meant to be a null terminator. Code such as if(str[i] == '\0') will check if the specific character is the null terminator.
Please note that the term null terminator has nothing to do with null pointers or the NULL macro! This can be confusing - very similar names but very different meanings. This is why the null terminator is sometimes referred to as NUL with one L, not to be confused with NULL or null pointers. See answers to this SO question for further details.
The "hello" in your code is called a string literal. This is to be regarded as a read-only string. The "" syntax means that the compiler will append a null terminator in the end of the string literal automatically. So if you print out sizeof("hello") you will get 6, not 5, because you get the size of the array including a null terminator.
It compiles cleanly with gcc
Indeed, not even a warning. This is because of a subtle detail/flaw in the C language that allows character arrays to be initialized with a string literal that contains exactly as many characters as there is room in the array and then silently discard the null terminator (C17 6.7.9/15). The language is purposely behaving like this for historical reasons, see Inconsistent gcc diagnostic for string initialization for details. Also note that C++ is different here and does not allow this trick/flaw to be used.
From the C Standard (7.1.1 Definitions of terms)
1 A string is a contiguous sequence of characters terminated by and
including the first null character. The term multibyte string is
sometimes used instead to emphasize special processing given to
multibyte characters contained in the string or to avoid confusion
with a wide string. A pointer to a string is a pointer to its initial
(lowest addressed) character. The length of a string is the number of
bytes preceding the null character and the value of a string is the
sequence of the values of the contained characters, in order.
In this declaration
char str [5] = "hello";
the string literal "hello" has the internal representation like
{ 'h', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o', '\0' }
so it has 6 characters including the terminating zero. Its elements are used to initialize the character array str which reserve space only for 5 characters.
The C Standard (opposite to the C++ Standard) allows such an initialization of a character array when the terminating zero of a string literal is not used as an initializer.
However as a result the character array str does not contain a string.
If you want that the array would contain a string you could write
char str [6] = "hello";
or just
char str [] = "hello";
In the last case the size of the character array is determined from the number of initializers of the string literal that is equal to 6.
Can all strings be considered an array of characters (Yes), can all character arrays be considered strings (No).
Why Not? and Why does it matter?
In addition to the other answers explaining that the length of a string is not stored anywhere as part of the string and the references to the standard where a string is defined, the flip-side is "How do the C library functions handle strings?"
While a character array can hold the same characters, it is simply an array of characters unless the last character is followed by the nul-terminating character. That nul-terminating character is what allows the array of characters to be considered (handled as) a string.
All functions in C that expect a string as an argument expect the sequence of characters to be nul-terminated. Why?
It has to do with the way all string functions work. Since the length isn't included as part of an array, string-functions, scan forward in the array until the nul-character (e.g. '\0' -- equivalent to decimal 0) is found. See ASCII Table and Description. Regardless whether you are using strcpy, strchr, strcspn, etc.. All string functions rely on the nul-terminating character being present to define where the end of that string is.
A comparison of two similar functions from string.h will emphasize the importance of the nul-terminating character. Take for example:
char *strcpy(char *dest, const char *src);
The strcpy function simply copies bytes from src to dest until the nul-terminating character is found telling strcpy where to stop copying characters. Now take the similar function memcpy:
void *memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, size_t n);
The function performs a similar operation, but does not consider or require the src parameter to be a string. Since memcpy cannot simply scan forward in src copying bytes to dest until a nul-terminating character is reached, it requires an explicit number of bytes to copy as a third parameter. This third parameter provides memcpy with the same size information strcpy is able to derive simply by scanning forward until a nul-terminating character is found.
(which also emphasizes what goes wrong in strcpy (or any function expecting a string) if you fail to provide the function with a nul-terminated string -- it has no idea where to stop and will happily race off across the rest of your memory segment invoking Undefined Behavior until a nul-character just happens to be found somewhere in memory -- or a Segmentation Fault occurs)
That is why functions expecting a nul-terminated string must be passed a nul-terminated string and why it matters.
Intuitively...
Think of an array as a variable (holds things) and a string as a value (can be placed in a variable).
They are certainly not the same thing. In your case the variable is too small to hold the string, so the string gets cut off. ("quoted strings" in C have an implicit null character at the end.)
However it's possible to store a string in an array that is much larger than the string.
Note that the usual assignment and comparison operators (= == < etc.) don't work as you might expect. But the strxyz family of functions comes pretty close, once you know what you're doing. See the C FAQ on strings and arrays.
As we know a string terminates with '\0'.
It's because to know the compiler that string ended, or to secure from garbage values.
But how does an array terminate?
If '\0' is used it will take it as 0 a valid integer,
So how does the compiler knows the array ended?
C does not perform bounds checking on arrays. That's part of what makes it fast. However that also means it's up to you to ensure you don't read or write past the end of an array. So the language will allow you to do something like this:
int arr[5];
arr[10] = 4;
But if you do, you invoke undefined behavior. So you need to keep track of how large an array is yourself and ensure you don't go past the end.
Note that this also applies to character arrays, which can be treated as a string if it contains a sequence of characters terminated by a null byte. So this is a string:
char str[10] = "hello";
And so is this:
char str[5] = { 'h', 'i', 0, 0, 0 };
But this is not:
char str[5] = "hello"; // no space for the null terminator.
C doesn't provide any protections or guarantees to you about 'knowing the array is ended.' That's on you as the programmer to keep in mind in order to avoid accessing memory outside your array.
C language does not have native string type. In C, strings are actually one-dimensional array of characters terminated by a null character '\0'.
From C Standard#7.1.1p1 [emphasis mine]
A string is a contiguous sequence of characters terminated by and including the first null character. The term multibyte string is sometimes used instead to emphasize special processing given to multibyte characters contained in the string or to avoid confusion with a wide string. A pointer to a string is a pointer to its initial (lowest addressed) character. The length of a string is the number of bytes preceding the null character and the value of a string is the sequence of the values of the contained characters, in order.
String is a special case of character array which is terminated by a null character '\0'. All the standard library string related functions read the input string based on this rule i.e. read until first null character.
There is no significance of null character '\0' in array of any type apart from character array in C.
So, apart from string, for all other types of array, programmer is suppose to explicitly keep the track of number of elements in the array.
Also, note that, first null character ('\0') is the indication of string termination but it is not stopping you to read beyond it.
Consider this example:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
char str[5] = {'H', 'i', '\0', 'z'};
printf ("%s\n", str);
printf ("%c\n", str[3]);
return 0;
}
When you print the string
printf ("%s\n", str);
the output you will get is - Hi
because with %s format specifier, printf() writes every byte up to and not including the first null terminator [note the use of null character in the strings], but you can also print the 4th character of array as it is within the range of char array str though beyond first '\0' character
printf ("%c\n", str[3]);
the output you will get is - z
Additional:
Trying to access array beyond its size lead to undefined behavior which includes the program may execute incorrectly (either crashing or silently generating incorrect results), or it may fortuitously do exactly what the programmer intended.
It’s just a matter of convention. If you wanted to, you could totally write code that handled array termination (for arrays of any type) via some sentinel value. Here’s an example that does just that, arbitrarily using -1 as the sentinel:
int length(int arr[]) {
int i;
for (i = 0; arr[i] != -1; i++) {}
return i;
}
However, this is obviously utterly unpractical: You couldn’t use -1 in the array any longer.
By contrast, for C strings the sentinel value '\0' is less problematic because it’s expected that normal test won’t contain this character. This assumption is kind of valid. But even so there are obviously many strings which do contain '\0' as a valid character, and null-termination is therefore by no means universal.
One very common alternative is to store strings in a struct that looks something like this:
struct string {
unsigned int length;
char *buffer;
}
That is, we explicitly store a length alongside a buffer. This buffer isn’t null-terminated (although in practice it often has an additional terminal '\0' byte for compatibility with C functions).
Anyway, the answer boils down to: For C strings, null termination is a convenient convention. But it is only a convention, enforced by the C string functions (and by the C string literal syntax). You could use a similar convention for other array types but it would be prohibitively impractical. This is why other conventions developed for arrays. Notably, most functions that deal with arrays expect both an array and a length parameter. This length parameter determines where the array terminates.
In C, when I initialize my array this way:
char full_name[] = {
't', 'o', 'a', 'n'
};
and print it with printf("%s", full_name);
and run it with valgrind I got error
Uninitialised value was create by stack allocation
Why does that happen?
Since %s format specifier expects a null-terminated string, the resulting behavior of your code is undefined. Your program is considered ill-formed, and can produce any output at all, produce no output, crash, and so on. To put this shortly, don't do that.
This is not to say that all arrays of characters must be null-terminated: the rule applies only to arrays of characters intended to use as C strings, e.g. to be passed to printf on %s format specifier, or to be passed to strlen or other string functions of the Standard C library.
If you are intended to use your char array for something else, it does not need to be null terminated. For example, this use is fully defined:
char full_name[] = {
't', 'o', 'a', 'n'
};
for (size_t i = 0 ; i != sizeof(full_name) ; i++) {
printf("%c", full_name[i]);
}
If you do not provide the '\0' at the end for the comma separated brace enclosed initializer list, technically, full_name is not a string, as the char array is not null-terminated.
Just to clear things out a bit, unlike the initializer being string literal, a comma separated list does not automatically count and put the terminating null character into the array.
So, in case of a definition like
char full_name[] = {
't', 'o', 'a', 'n'
};
the size of the array is 4 and it has 't', 'o', 'a', 'n' into it.
OTOH, in case of
char full_name[] = "toan";
full_name will be of size 5 and will contain 't', 'o', 'a', 'n' and '\0'into it.
When you try to make use of the former array with any function operating on strings (i.e., expects a null-terminated char array), you'll get undefined behavior as most of the string functions will go out of bound in search for the null-terminator.
In your particular example, for %s format specifier with printf(), quoting the C11 standard, chapter §7.21.6.1, fprintf() function description (emphasis mine)
s If no l length modifier is present, the argument shall be a pointer to the initial
element of an array of character type.280) Characters from the array are
written up to (but not including) the terminating null character. If the
precision is specified, no more than that many bytes are written. If the
precision is not specified or is greater than the size of the array, the array shall
contain a null character.
That means, the printf() will look for a null-terminator to mark/understand the end of the array. In your example, the lack of the null-terminator will cause printf() to go beyond the allocated memory (full_name[3]) and access out-of-bound memory (full_name[4]) which will cause the UB.
If you use a non-null-terminated char sequence as a string, C functions will just keep going. It's the '\0' that tells them to stop. So, whatever happens to be in memory after the sequence will be taken as part of the string. This may eventually cross a memory boundary and cause an error, or it may just print gibberish if it happens to find a '\0' somewhere and stop.
printf will interpret "%s" as a standard C string. This means that the code that is generated will simply keep reading characters until it finds a null terminator (\0).
Often this will mean this wandering pointer will venture into uncharted memory and Valgrind will notice this as an error.
You have to explicitly add your own null terminator when initialising a char array, if you intend to use it as a string at some point.
Before passing the instruction pointer to a function expecting a c string you are implicitly entering a legally binding contract with that code block. In the primary section of this contract both parties agree to refrain from exchanging dedicated string length information and assert that all passed parameters declared as strings point to a sequence of characters terminated by \0 which gives each party the option to calculate the length.
If you don't include a terminating \0 you will commit a fundamental breach of contract.
The OS court will randomly sue your executable with madness or even death.
char label[8] = "abcdefgh";
char arr[7] = "abcdefg";
printf("%s\n",label);
printf("%s",arr);
====output==========
abcdefgh
abcdefgÅ
Why Å is appended at the end of the string arr?
I am running C code in Turbo C ++.
printf expects NUL-terminated strings. Increase the size of your char arrays by one to make space for the terminating NUL character (it is added automatically by the = "..." initializer).
If you don't NUL-terminate your strings, printf will keep reading until it finds a NUL character, so you will get a more or less random result.
Your variables label and arr are not strings. They are arrays of characters.
To be strings (and for you to be able to pass them to functions declared in <string.h>) they need a NUL terminator in the space reserved for them.
Definition of "string" from the Standard
7.1.1 Definitions of terms
1 A string is a contiguous sequence of characters terminated by and including
the first null character. The term multibyte string is sometimes used
instead to emphasize special processing given to multibyte characters
contained in the string or to avoid confusion with a wide string. A pointer
to a string is a pointer to its initial (lowest addressed) character. The
length of a string is the number of bytes preceding the null character and
the value of a string is the sequence of the values of the contained
characters, in order.
Your string is not null terminated, so printf is running into junk data. You need to use the '\0' at the end of the string.
Using GCC (on Linux), it prints more garbage:
abcdefgh°ÃÕÄÕ¿UTÞÄÕ¿UTÞ·
abcdefgabcdefgh°ÃÕÄÕ¿UTÞÄÕ¿UTÞ·
This is because, you are printing two character arrays as strings (using %s).
This works fine:
char label[9] = "abcdefgh\0"; char arr[8] = "abcdefg\0";
printf("%s\n",label); printf("%s",arr);
However, you need not mention the "\0" explicitly. Just make sure the array size is large enough, i.e 1 more than the number of characters in your strings.