I'm writing a Pong game in C using ncurses. I placed function definitions for the ball, the player, and the AI opponent into ball.c, player.c, and ai.c respectively. Each of these files includes another file, pong.h, which contains function prototypes, structure definitions, and global variables. My main function is in pong.c, which provides the game loop and handles keypresses.
My project also includes a number of libraries: ncurses.h, stdlib.h, and time.h. Where should I include these libraries? Currently, they are included in pong.h, like so:
#ifndef _PONG_H
#define _PONG_H
#include <ncurses.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
/* everything else */
#endif
However, only certain files make use of functions in stdlib.h/time.h. This leads me to believe that it might make more sense to only include one-use libraries in the file where they are used. On the other hand, including all libraries in one place is more straightforward.
I'm wondering if there is a way to do this which is considered more conventional or efficient.
There is no firm rule, instead you should balance convenience and hygiene. You're already aware that the meta include is more convenient for your other .c files, but I'll emphasize some more obscure concerns with header files:
Putting dependencies (e.g. ncurses.h) in your public header files may make it more difficult to include your header file in other projects
The transitive costs of header files will dominate compile time, so reducing unnecessary includes will allow your project to compile more quickly. Programs have been developed to manage includes.
Header files can destructively interfere with each other, for instance because of macros that change the semantics of subsequently included header files. windows.h is probably the most notorious culprit, and the risks can be difficult to quantify for large header files or large sets of header files.
Over time it can become obvious what header files should actually be bundled, e.g. when the convenience benefit is high and the risks and costs are low. On a small project perhaps it is obvious from the outset.
Preferably, you should include the headers in the files that are actually using them even if it might be a little redundant. That way if later you remove an include to a header you defined, you can avoid compilation issues if that file happened to use stdio.h functions but didn't include it for itself.
It's also more clear at a glance of the first few lines what the file is using.
Related
Suppose I have a code like this
foo.h
#pragma once
#ifndef _HEADER
#define _HEADER
//code
#endif
foo.c
#include "header.h"
//code
main.c
#include "foo.h"
int main() {
return 0
}
Why should I include foo.h in foo.c? It can still work without it.
You are correct that you do not HAVE to include the module's header file in the module's C file.
There are a few reasons why you may wish to do so. (What follows is a non-exhaustive list).
As others have noted, it helps ensure that the declarations in the header file are consistent with the definitions in the C file. This is of particular importance when some or all of the routines are to be called from another module. In other words, this can help cut down on errors.
It safely and quickly allows you a little extra flexibility in where you place the routines in the file. Granted this can be achieved with forward declarations in the C file, but if the routines are going to be called from another module, then save yourself the extra typing (and possible typos) and make use of the header file inclusion. Why would you want the flexibility? It allows you to group the routines as you see fit for both maintainability and readability.
It helps to keep your list of include files leaner and cleaner. Presumably, your module's header file will include anything that it needs. Therefore, including that header file means that you don't have to explicitly include all those extra header files. Experience has taught me that a modules with lean include lists often have fewer WTF moments (as well as having a very small positive impact on compilation time).
Hope this helps.
Lately I have been using header files to split up my program into separate files, (C files containing functions and header files declaring them). Every thing works fine but for some reason, I need to include <stdio.h> and <stdlib.h> in EVERY C file... or my project fails to compile. Is this expected behavior?
C modules need to know either how something is defined, or where it can find a definition. If the definition is in the header file, then you should include it in the modules that use it. Here is a link to information regarding header files.
The answer would depend on whether or not that functions might depend on other declared functions in other .c/.h files.
For example:
filea.c:
#include "filea.h";
methodA()
{
methodB();
}
fileb.c:
#include <somelibrary.h>
#include "fileb.h"
methodB();
{
somelibrarycode();
}
This will not compile unless filea.c includes the header for fileb.h as it has some external dependency that is not resolved.
If this is not what you're describing than there is some other spaghettification happening, or you accidentally statically typed functions preventing them from being seen outside of the .c file.
One possible solution to this problem is to have a single shared.h with all the other includes, but I personally don't recommend this as this merely masks the issue instead of making it readily apparently which files depend on what and establish clear lines of dependency.
They must be included some way.
Some projects require long list of includes in .c files, possibly with mandatory sort, even forcing assumption that no header includes any other header.
Some allow assuming some includes form some headers.
Some use collection headers (that include a list of small headers) and replace long lists with those.
Some go even further, using "forced header" option of compiler, so include will not appear anywhere, and declare the content to be implicitly assumed. It may go on project or whole codebase level, or combined. It plays pretty well with precompiled headers.
(And there are many more strategies, you get the figure, all with some pros&cons.)
So currently in my programming I now have a fairly large range of functions I have created and stored in separate C files that I use quite frequently from project to project.
My question is what is the simplest, most effective way to implement them into other projects? Currently I just make a header file for each new project that has the function prototypes for all the custom functions I want to use.
I then have every C file in the project include this "master" header. In this header I also include header files that each C file utilizes, so every C file has one header; let's just call it master.h.
I feel like I am doing this completely wrong. Should I be making header files for each C file and including them into a master header file? or should I just create header files per C file and include them as needed? If I do that how will everything still be linked together?
What is the best way to go about using header files in projects?
Do not have a header file including other header files. Let the .c file do that - makes compilation quicker.
Use forward declarations. Makes recompilation quicker as it does not need to open up other files and if any simple change the make command will spend ages compiling lots of stuff.
Group functions together in both a header file and the corresponding .c file if they logically fit together. For static libraries the linker picks out the appropriate bits. For dynamic libraries they are loaded at run time (hence can be used by other binaries) if not currently in memory.
Do not have a master.h. Just make libraries contain functions that are related (e.g. math function, input/output functions etc). The various projects can pick 'n' chose what they require.
I recommend against having a master.h file, as your whole project ends up being too coupled. Every time you change master.h all your source files need to be recompiled, which significantly slows down the build process. Instead, try to create .h files with related functions. The C library is a good inspiration for this: stdlib.h, math.h etc.
In order to use these headers, you should include them in each .c, just like you would with the standard C headers:
#include <math.h>
#include <stdio.h>
As for linking, this is a totally different subject. If most of your functions are inlined, you do not have to worry about linking. Otherwise, you should define them in .c files which are named similarly to your headers (e.g., utils.c for utils.h etc.)
Create a header file for all the .c files. Group the similar functions in a .c file. Dont forget to add header guard in each header files.
For example consider a header file one.h, it should contain the below header guards.
#ifndef ONE_H
#define ONE_H
//give your function prototypes here.
#endif //ONE_H
Header guard will be useful to avoid double includes.
Should I put the includes in the header file or the source file? If the header file contains the include statements, then if I include that header file in my source, then will my source file have all of the included files that were in my header? Or should I just include them in my source file only?
Only put includes in a header if the header itself needs them.
Examples:
Your function returns type size_t. Then #include <stddef.h> in the header file.
Your function uses strlen. Then #include <string.h> in the source file.
There's been quite a bit of disagreement about this over the years. At one time, it was traditional that a header only declare what was in whatever module it was related to, so many headers had specific requirements that you #include a certain set of headers (in a specific order). Some extremely traditional C programmers still follow this model (religiously, in at least some cases).
More recently, there's a movement toward making most headers standalone. If that header requires something else, the header itself handles that, ensuring that whatever it needs is included (in the correct order, if there are ordering issues). Personally, I prefer this -- especially when the order of headers can be important, it solves the problem once, instead of requiring everybody who uses it to solve the problem yet again.
Note that most headers should only contain declarations. This means adding an unnecessary header shouldn't (normally) have any effect on your final executable. The worst that happens is that it slows compilation a bit.
Your #includes should be of header files, and each file (source or header) should #include the header files it needs. Header files should #include the minimum header files necessary, and source files should also, though it's not as important for source files.
The source file will have the headers it #includes, and the headers they #include, and so on up to the maximum nesting depth. This is why you don't want superfluous #includes in header files: they can cause a source file to include a lot of header files it may not need, slowing compilation.
This means that it's entirely possible that header files might be included twice, and that can be a problem. The traditional method is to put "include guards" in header files, such as this for file foo.h:
#ifndef INCLUDE_FOO_H
#define INCLUDE_FOO_H
/* everything in header goes here */
#endif
The approach I have evolved into over twenty years is this;
Consider a library.
There are multiple C files, one internal H file and one external H file. The C files include the internal H file. The internal H file includes the external H file.
You see that from the compilers POV, as it compiles a C file, there is a hierarchy;
external -> internal -> C code
This is the correct ordering, since that which is external is everything a third party needs to use the library. That which is internal is required to compile the C code.
If header file A #includes header files B and C, then every source file that #includes A will also get B and C #included. The pre-processor literally just performs text substitution: anywhere it finds text that says #include <foo.h> it replaces it with the text of foo.h file.
There are different opinions on whether you should put #includes in headers or source files. Personally, I prefer to put all #includes in source file by default, but any header files that cannot compile without other pre-requisite headers should #include those headers themselves.
And every header file should contain an include guard to prevent it being included multiple times.
Make all of your files so that they can be built using only what they include. If you don't need an include in your header remove it. In a big project if you don't maintain this discipline you leave yourself open to breaking an entire build when someone removes an include from a header file that is being used by a consumer of that file and not even by the header.
In some environments, compilation will be fastest if one only includes the header files one needs. In other environments, compilation will be optimized if all source files can use the same primary collection of headers (some files may have additional headers beyond the common subset). Ideally, headers should be constructed so multiple #include operations will have no effect. It may be good to surround #include statements with checks for the file-to-be-included's include-guard, though that creates a dependency upon the format of that guard. Further, depending upon a system's file caching behavior, an unnecessary #include whose target ends up being completely #ifdef'ed away may not take long.
Another thing to consider is that if a function takes a pointer to a struct, one can write the prototype as
void foo(struct BAR_s *bar);
without a definition for BAR_s having to be in scope. A very handy approach for avoiding unnecessary includes.
PS--in many of my projects, there will be a file which it's expected that every module will #include, containing things like typedefs for integer sizes and a few common structures and unions [e.g.
typedef union {
unsigned long l;
unsigned short lw[2];
unsigned char lb[4];
} U_QUAD;
(Yes, I know I'd be in trouble if I moved to a big-endian architecture, but since my compiler doesn't allow anonymous structs in unions, using named identifiers for the bytes within the union would require that they be accessed as theUnion.b.b1 etc. which seems rather annoying.
You should only include files in your header that you need to declare constants and function declarations. Technically, these includes will also be included in your source file, but for clarity sake, you should only include in each file the files you actually need to use. You should also protect them in your header from multiple inclusion thusly:
#ifndef NAME_OF_HEADER_H
#define NAME_OF_HEADER_H
...definition of header file...
#endif
This prevents the header from being included multiple times, resulting in a compiler error.
Your source file will have the include statements if your put it in the header. However, in some cases it would be better to put them in the source file.
Remember that if you include that header in any other sources, they will also get the includes from the header, and that is not always desirable. You should only include stuff where it is used.
I've worked with a number of C projects during my programming career and the header file structures usually fall into one of these two patterns:
One header file containing all function prototypes
One .h file for each .c file, containing prototypes for the functions defined in that module only.
The advantages of option 2 are obvious to me - it makes it cheaper to share the module between multiple projects and makes dependencies between modules easier to see.
But what are the advantages of option 1? It must have some advantages otherwise it would not be so popular.
This question would apply to C++ as well as C, but I have never seen #1 in a C++ project.
Placement of #defines, structs etc. also varies but for this question I would like to focus on function prototypes.
I think the prime motivation for #1 is ... laziness. People think it's either too hard to manage the dependencies that splitting things into separate files can make more obvious, and/or think it's somehow "overkill" to have separate files for everything.
It can also, of course, often be a case of "historical reasons", where the program or project grew from something small, and no-one took the time to refactor the header files.
Option 1 allows for having all the definitions in one place so that you have to include/search just one file instead of having to include/search many files. This advantage is more obvious if your system is shipped as a library to a third party - they don't care much about your library structure, they just want to be able to use it.
Another reason for using a different .h for every .c is compile time. If there is just one .h (or if there are more of them but you are including them all in every .c file), every time you make a change in the .h file, you will have to recompile every .c file. This, in a large project, can represent a valuable amount of time being lost, which can also break your workflow.
1 is just unnecessary. I can't see a good reason to do it, and plenty to avoid it.
Three rules for following #2 and have no problems:
start EVERY header file with a
#ifndef _HEADER_Namefile
#define _HEADER_Namefile_
end the file with
#endif
That will allow you to include the same header file multiple times on the same module (innadvertely may happen) without causing any fuss.
you can't have definitions on your header files... and that's something everybody thinks he/she knows, about function prototypes, but almost ever ignores for global variables.
If you want a global variable, which by definition should be visible outside it's defining C module, use the extern keyword:
extern unsigned long G_BEER_COUNTER;
which instructs the compiler that the G_BEER_COUNTER symbol is actually an unsigned long (so, works like a declaration), that on some other module will have it's proper definition/initialization. (This also allows the linker to keep the resolved/unresolved symbol table.) The actual definition (same statement without extern) goes in the module .c file.
only on proven absolute necessity do you include other headers within a header file. include statements should only be visible on .c files (the modules). That allows you to better interpret the dependecies, and find/resolve issues.
I would recommend a hybrid approach: making a separate header for each component of the program which could conceivably be used independently, then making a project header that includes all of them. That way, each source file only needs to include one header (no need to go updating all your source files if you refactor components), but you keep a logical organization to your declarations and make it easy to reuse your code.
There is also I believe a 3rd option: each .c has its own .h, but there is also one .h which includes all other .h files. This brings the best of both worlds at the expense of keeping a .h up to date, though that could done automatically.
With this option, internally you use the individual .h files, but a 3rd party can just include the all-encompassing .h file.
When you have a very large project with hundreds/thousands of small header files, dependency checking and compilation can significantly slow down as lots of small files must be opened and read. This issue can be often solved by using precompiled headers.
In C++ you would definitely want one header file per class and use pre-compiled headers as mentioned above.
One header file for an entire project is unworkable unless the project is extremely small - like a school assignment
That depends on how much functionality is in one header/source file. If you need to include 10 files just to, say, sort something, it's bad.
For example, if I want to use STL vectors I just include and I don't care what internals are necessary for vector to be used. GCC's includes 8 other headers -- allocator, algobase, construct, uninitialized, vector and bvector. It would be painful to include all those 8 just to use vector, would you agree?
BUT library internal headers should be as sparse as possible. Compilers are happier if they don't include unnecessary stuff.