What I need very precisely is an array A[10] and each of its element pointing to the respective element of array B[10] whose each element store its index.
Hence, A[1] points to B[1] and B[1] has value of 1.
So, when I call *A[1] or *B[1], I get 1.
I know it can be super easy if the array B[10] is not an array of pointers but of integers but I need this for another purpose.
This is what I did but segmentation fault was offered.
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
int *A[10];
int *B[10];
for(int i=0; i<10; i++) {
A[i] = B[i];
*B[i] = i;
printf("\n%d %d",*A[i],*B[i]);
}
}
By the way, I am not very proficient in pointers.
Your commented code :
int main() {
int *A[10]; // an array of 10 pointers, each of them pointing nowhere
int *B[10]; // an array of 10 pointers, each of them pointing nowhere
// now each array a and b contain 10 uninitialized pointers,
// they contain ideterminate values and they point nowhere
for(int i=0; i<10; i++) {
A[i] = B[i]; // copy an uninitialized pointer
// this usually works but it's pointless
*B[i] = i; // you assign i to the int pointed by *B[i]
// but as *B[i] points nowhere you end up with a segfault
printf("\n%d %d",*A[i],*B[i]); // you never get here because the previous
// line terminates the program with a segfault,
// but you'd get a segfault here too for
// the same reason
}
}
Your program is basically equivalent to this:
int main() {
int *a; // a is not initialized, it points nowhere
*a = 1; // probably you'll get a segfault here
}
Accessing the thing pointed by a pointer is called dereferencing the pointer. Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer results in undefined behaviour (google that term), most likely you'll get a seg fault.
I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve, but you probably want something like this:
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
int* A[10];
int B[10];
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
A[i] = &B[i];
B[i] = i;
printf("%d %d\n", *A[i], B[i]);
}
}
Related
Learning C and this confusing me:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(){
int m[5][5];
int count = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++){
for(int j = 0; j < 5; j++){
m[i][j] = count++;
}
}
int **p = m;
int (*k)[5] = m;
printf("%p\t%p\t%p", *p, *k, *m);
return 0;
}
that's what has been printed:
0x100000000 0x7ffff1fc9d70 0x7ffff1fc9d70
I'm really confused why dereference *p is 0x100000000, shouldn't it be 0x7ffff1fc9d70?
You’re thinking that m is of type int **, right?
It’s not. If you had done this, it would be:
int *m[5];
That make an array of five pointers to int, so m would be pointer to pointer to int.
However, if you do this:
int m[5][5];
You get enough space for 25 ints, which the compiler will access as a 5x5 two-dimensional array. p points to the beginning of that array. Dereference it, and the compiler reads the beginning of that array and interprets it as a pointer to int. Change the numbers you’re filling it with, and you’ll get different pseudo-pointers.
Here is a C program in textbook, it asks a 3*5 2D array from users and prints the third line.
I am confused with int* p[5]. Why here needs to have [5], I think just int* p is OK. It can repeatedly add and point to the next memory space in the int array. And can anyone explain how pointer works in this program?
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void){
int a[3][5];
int i,j;
int *p[5];
p = &a[0];
printf("Please input:\n");
for(i = 0; i < 3; i++){
for(j = 0; j<5;j++){
scanf("%d\n",(*(p+i))+j);
}
}
p = &a[2];
printf("the third line is:\n");
for(j = 0; j<5; j++){
printf("%5d", *((*p)+j));
}
printf("\n");
}
int *p[5];
is an array of five pointers to int.
What you want is a pointer to an array of five ints
int (*p)[5];
because &a[0] is the address of the 1st element of a which is an int[5].
The compiler should have clearly issued at least a warning on this, if not an error, which would be expected.
More on this here: C pointer to array/array of pointers disambiguation
I'm trying to do pointer arithmetic with a pointer to array, but I get a wrong value since I can't dereference the pointer properly.
Here is the code:
#include "stdlib.h"
#include "stdio.h"
int main()
{
int a[] = {10, 12, 34};
for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i)
{
printf("%d", a[i]);
}
printf("\n");
int (*b)[3] = &a;
for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i)
{
printf("%d", *(b++));
}
printf("\n");
return 0;
}
In the second for I can't get to print the correct value.
It doesn't work even if I write
printf("%d", *b[i]);
I'd like to see how to print correctly using the b++ and the b[i] syntax.
The following should work:
printf("%d\n", *( *b+i ));
// * b + i will give you each consecutive address starting at address of the first element a[0].
// The outer '*' will give you the value at that location.
instead of:
printf("%d", *(b++));
You have declared b to be a pointer to arrays of 3 integers and you have initialized it with address of a.
int (*b)[3] = &a;
In the first loop you will print the first element of a array but then you will move 3*sizeof(int) and trigger undefined behavior trying to print whatever there is.
To print it correctly:
int *b = a;
// int *b = &a[0]; // same thing
// int *b = (int*)&a; // same thing, &a[0] and &a both points to same address,
// though they are of different types: int* and int(*)[3]
// ...so incrementing they directly would be incorrect,
// but we take addresses as int*
for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i)
{
printf("%d", (*b++));
}
gcc will complain about the formatting in the second for loop: it will tell you format specifies type 'int' but the argument has type 'int *
your assignment of a to b should look like this:
int *b = a
Here is my code that works. The function initializes the array, a, to values 0 - 3
int main(void)
{
int a[4];
pointer(a);
return 0;
}
void pointer(int* a)
{
int *p, i;
p = a;
for(i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
*a++ = i;
printf(" %d", p[i]);
}
}
But when I combine it all into main(), it no longer works.
int main(void)
{
int a[4], *p, i;
p = a;
for(i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
*a++ = i;
printf("%d", p[i]);
}
return 0;
}
Instead, it prints out memory addresses or something. It works when I dynamically allocate a[], so I'm guessing it has something to do with the way a[] is managed in memory. Can someone tell me why the second main() doesn't work?
In the function pointer, the argument a is a pointer. But in main, a is an array, you can't modify an array name, so *a++ = i is invalid.
I can't even compile your code, and the error illustrates why:
$ gcc -o foo foo.c
./foo.c:9:11: error: cannot increment value of type 'int [4]'
*a++ = i;
~^
1 error generated.
You aren't actually using a pointer in your code at all. If you change it as follows, it works as you expect:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int a[4], i;
int* p = a;
for(i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
*p++ = i;
printf("%d", a[i]);
}
return 0;
}
C arrays decay into pointers in some circunstances, but they aren't pointers. Use p instead of a.
It works when you dynamically allocate a because malloc() returns a pointer, not an array.
you should know the differences between array and pointer.I suggest .
In function,the array you put in will turn to pointer(point to first element of array),it's a variable of pointer,so you can do increasement,in main,a is a address of first element,it's constant,so you can't change.you should change pointer p.
In functions you'r passing the array address point to a pointer. and pointer is accessing each variable when u increment it. this is called a walking pointer.
but in case when u use it in main you'r assuming that array is a simple . Think of an array declared by compiler like
int *const array;
so when you try to increment it. it pops an error. so use one more Walking pointer inside
main so u traverse the array
I don't understand why this works:
void main() {
int * b;
b = (int *)malloc(sizeof(int));
*b = 1;
printf("*b = %d\n", *b);
}
while this does not (gets segmentation fault for the malloc()):
void main() {
int ** a;
int i;
for (i = 0; i<= 3; i++) {
a[i] = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int));
*(a[i]) = i;
printf("*a[%d] = %d\n", i, *(a[i]));
}
}
since I find a[i] is just like b in the first example.
BTW, a[i] is equal to *(a+i), right?
You need to allocate memory for a first, so that you can access its members as a[i].
So if you want to allocate for 4 int * do
a = malloc(sizeof(int *) * 4);
for (i = 0; i<= 3; i++) {
...
}
or define it as array of integer pointers as
int *a[4];
a is a 2 dimensional pointer, you have to allocate both dimension.
b is a 1 dimensional pointer, you have to allocate only one dimension and that's what you're doing with
b = (int *)malloc(sizeof(int));
So in order the second example to work you have to allocate the space for the pointer of pointer
void main() {
int ** a;
int i;
a = (int**)malloc(4*sizeof(int*));
for (i = 0; i<= 3; i++) {
a[i] = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int));
*(a[i]) = i;
printf("*a[%d] = %d\n", i, *(a[i]));
}
The allocated pointer is written to uninitialized memory (you never set a to anything), causing undefined behavior.
So no, it's not at all equivalent to the code in the first example.
You would need something like:
int **a;
a = malloc(3 * sizeof *a);
first, to make sure a holds something valid, then you can use indexing and assign to a[0].
Further, this:
a[i] = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int));
doesn't make any sense. It's assigning to a[i], an object of type int *, but allocating space for sizeof (int).
Finally, don't cast the return value of malloc() in C.
actually malloc it's not that trivial if you really want safe and portable, on linux for example malloc could return a positive response for a given request even if the actual memory it's not even really reserved for your program or the memory it's not writable.
For what I know both of your examples can potentially return a seg-fault or simply crash.
#ruppells-vulture I would argue that malloc is really portable and "safe" for this reasons.