Storage size of ' ' isn't know [duplicate] - c

I'm a bit new to C and I'm having a bit of trouble with a project I'm currently working on. Essentially I have the following files: main.c, alarm.c, alarm.h
I have a struct declaration in alarm.c that looks like:
#define STRLEN 150;
struct alarmparams
{
char time[STRLEN];
char duration[STRLEN];
char snooze[STRLEN];
char port[STRLEN];
};
In main.c I have:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include "alarm.h"
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
struct alarmparams params;
printf("%s, %s\n", params.time, params.duration);
}
And in alarm.h I have:
struct alarmparams;
Right now when I go to compile I get the following error:
error: storage size of ‘params’ isn’t known
I've looked through other posts regarding this error, so I have done a bit of research on this already. I've also tried some of the suggested solutions and it's either I get the exact same error or I got more on top of it. I'm at a lose as to how to fix this.
Is there something I'm missing? Did I declare something incorrectly?
In general should structs be declared in the header file or the c file? Or does it even matter? What's the different between:
struct foo {...};
and
typedef struct foo {...};

struct alarmparams;
is the declaration of an incomplete type. You can create a pointer to an object of this type but you cannot declare an object of this type or take its size until it has been completed. You have to make its complete declaration visible in main.c to declare an object of its type.
If you use the type in both alarm.c and main.c, just declare it in alarm.h and include alarm.h in main.c.
For you second question, the difference between:
struct foo {...};
and
typedef struct foo {...} foo_;
is in the latter case you also declare an alias foo_ for the type name struct foo.

You have to declare the structure in the header file alarm.h.
At the moment, when you include alarm.h, the code in main doesn't see the structure composition, all it sees is struct alarmparams;, so it doesn't know how long it is. How can you allocate space for something that you don't know how much space it takes?
typedef struct foo { ... }; is invalid: typedef expects you to provide an alias for a type. typedef struct foo { ... } foo_t; would be correct.
typedef is a storage class specifier, thus, you can think of it as any other regular declaration. Imagine you want an alias foo for the type bar: just declare a variable of type bar and call it foo. Now, prepend a typedef keyword behind, and you are done. Even complicated typedefs can be easily understood with this simple approach. Since struct foo { ... }; would be an invalid declaration for a variable (no name is provided), so is typedef struct foo { ... };.
In general, declare structures in the header file when you will reuse them in other source files. If you don't plan on doing so, declaring them on the .c file should be fine.

In addition to the other answers, the value of STRLEN must be known at compile time (it most likely is in this case, but just in case).

Related

cannot declare struct member within a structure in c

I want to declare a structure value in a different structure definition in header file. So I have done the following in header file. But compiler gives me the error message field myStructMember has incomplete type
in A.h header file:
struct My_A{
int value;
};
In B.h header file:
struct My_A; // forward declaration
struct My_B
{
struct My_A myStructMember; // error is here!
int differentValue;
};
Is it possible to declare a struct member within a structure declarations?
EDIT: My_A and My_B are declarated in different header file.
EDIT 2:
When I add include "A.h" in B.h, then it works. Does it make any problem?
In B.h header file:
include "A.h" // added this line insead of forward declaration
struct My_B
{
struct My_A myStructMember; // not any error anymore
int differentValue;
};
Not without # including A.h in B.h (or before B.h every time it is referenced - when the compiler parses My_B otherwise it lacks the information required to determine the size of My_A. You could use a pointer instead, but that gains all the overhead of handling them.
If you are just trying to achieve abstraction / details hiding, then you could change your forward declaration of My_A so that it is now a struct of the correct size (using a char array, for instance). Then you must make sure that nothing includes both A.h and B.h as that will cause a compiler error. Oh, and really make sure you get the size right or weird stuff will happen. There are ways to ensure this is correct using macro assertions.
e.g. make B.h
struct My_A{
char hidden_data[4];
};
struct My_B
{
struct My_A myStructMember;
int differentValue;
};
The error is what it says - you can't use struct until you has it's complete type. You simply don't know its size at that point. Forward declaration won't help here.
Alternatively you can use pointer to struct. Pointer size is known.

struct in C: Error storage size of 'params' isn't known

I'm a bit new to C and I'm having a bit of trouble with a project I'm currently working on. Essentially I have the following files: main.c, alarm.c, alarm.h
I have a struct declaration in alarm.c that looks like:
#define STRLEN 150;
struct alarmparams
{
char time[STRLEN];
char duration[STRLEN];
char snooze[STRLEN];
char port[STRLEN];
};
In main.c I have:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include "alarm.h"
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
struct alarmparams params;
printf("%s, %s\n", params.time, params.duration);
}
And in alarm.h I have:
struct alarmparams;
Right now when I go to compile I get the following error:
error: storage size of ‘params’ isn’t known
I've looked through other posts regarding this error, so I have done a bit of research on this already. I've also tried some of the suggested solutions and it's either I get the exact same error or I got more on top of it. I'm at a lose as to how to fix this.
Is there something I'm missing? Did I declare something incorrectly?
In general should structs be declared in the header file or the c file? Or does it even matter? What's the different between:
struct foo {...};
and
typedef struct foo {...};
struct alarmparams;
is the declaration of an incomplete type. You can create a pointer to an object of this type but you cannot declare an object of this type or take its size until it has been completed. You have to make its complete declaration visible in main.c to declare an object of its type.
If you use the type in both alarm.c and main.c, just declare it in alarm.h and include alarm.h in main.c.
For you second question, the difference between:
struct foo {...};
and
typedef struct foo {...} foo_;
is in the latter case you also declare an alias foo_ for the type name struct foo.
You have to declare the structure in the header file alarm.h.
At the moment, when you include alarm.h, the code in main doesn't see the structure composition, all it sees is struct alarmparams;, so it doesn't know how long it is. How can you allocate space for something that you don't know how much space it takes?
typedef struct foo { ... }; is invalid: typedef expects you to provide an alias for a type. typedef struct foo { ... } foo_t; would be correct.
typedef is a storage class specifier, thus, you can think of it as any other regular declaration. Imagine you want an alias foo for the type bar: just declare a variable of type bar and call it foo. Now, prepend a typedef keyword behind, and you are done. Even complicated typedefs can be easily understood with this simple approach. Since struct foo { ... }; would be an invalid declaration for a variable (no name is provided), so is typedef struct foo { ... };.
In general, declare structures in the header file when you will reuse them in other source files. If you don't plan on doing so, declaring them on the .c file should be fine.
In addition to the other answers, the value of STRLEN must be known at compile time (it most likely is in this case, but just in case).

Why is forward declaration of structure not working in my code? When can it be used in C?

Isn't forward declaration, whether for structures or functions, supposed to do what forward declaration is expected to do, ie, to let us use the structure or function before they are defined? Why is the forward declaration of a structure not working in my code? And the main thing that just misses me, is forward declaration of structures of any use in C at all? When is it used? Can you please give me a small C program example to illustrate this?
My program gives the error error: storage size of 'x' isn't known|.
#include<stdio.h>
struct test;
int main(void)
{
struct test x;
printf("%zu",sizeof(x)); //Gives Error
//printf("%zu",sizeof(struct test));//This fails too
}
struct test
{
int a;
char b;
};
New Edit I tried to do what Carl Noum said,but even this is not working:
#include<stdio.h>
struct test;
void foo(struct test*);
int main(void)
{
struct test x={53,'x'},*ptr=&x;
foo(ptr);
}
void foo(struct test* p)
{
printf("%d,%c",p->a,p->b);
}
struct test
{
int a;
char b;
};
The compiler has to know the struct's layout when it compiles the main function.
A forward declaration is useful if you only have a pointer but not the actual type.
For example if you have a struct that contains a pointer to another struct
struct foo {
struct bar *b;
...
};
It is also essential if the bar also contain foo like
struct bar;
struct foo {
struct bar *b;
};
struct bar {
struct foo f;
};
In this case you have to have bar pre-declared.
A forward declaration usually means that you don't have to include .h file inside other .h file. This can speed up compilation significantly if the .h file is big.
Functions yes, structures no. struct test is an incomplete type where you use it.
A common use case for incomplete types is to declare an opaque type. In a header file, you declare:
struct test;
And then some API that uses struct test only via pointers:
int func1(struct test *);
struct test *func2(void);
In the accompanying implementation, you include the full declaration so that your functions know what to do with the structure:
struct test
{
int a;
char b;
};
void func1(struct test *t)
{
return t->a;
}
Edit:
Your new code doesn't do anything differently - you're still trying to operate on an incomplete type, and you still can't do that. In particular, this declaration:
struct test x = {53,'x'};
Can't work if struct test is an incomplete type. You can (generally) only use pointers to an incomplete type. In this case, that might mean creating a function that allocates and returns a pointer to a new structure, rather than trying to declare and initialize one on the stack.
Struct type declared by a forward declaration (i.e. an incomplete type) can be used only in a limited number of ways. Applying sizeof to such a truct type is not one of them. On top of that, you can't use incomplete types in object definitions and you cannot access data fields of incomplete struct types.
In other words, sizeof requires a complete type. Your forward-declared struct type is not a complete type. Operator -> also requres a complete type of the left-hand side. Object definition (like struct test x) also requires a complete type.

Simple header file visibility confusion in C

I have a strange problem in C about including header files.
main.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include "location.h"
int waste_new_line();
int main()
{
location *crossroads = malloc(sizeof(*crossroads));
...
location.h
typedef struct Location_Struct location;
location.c
typedef struct Location_Struct {
int ID;
char *name;
char *description;
} location;
int setup_location(location* l, char* name)
{
...
Now this isn't working because
location *crossroads = malloc(sizeof(*crossroads));
is throwing an error:dereferencing pointer to incomplete type meaning that it can see the contents of location.h, yet it doesn't seem to be aware of location.c...
I've looked around and all the tutorials I've seen say that the linker will link both files together.
EDIT:
I have altered the code to include an initializer inside location.c as so:
main.c
...
#include "location.h"
int waste_new_line();
int main()
{
location *crossroads = initialize_location();
....
location.h
typedef struct Location_Struct location;
location* initialize_location();
location.c
...
typedef struct Location_Struct {
int ID;
char *name;
char *description;
} location;
location* initialize_location(location* l)
{
return malloc(sizeof(location));
}
...
This is still throwing the same error, yet only when I try and access the members of crossroads using:
crossroads->description
this will throw the deferencing to incomplete type error.
EDIT 2: For now I've decided to just put the struct definition in the header file...
This behaviour is expected. When you #include "location.h", only the header file is visible to the compiler. The location.c file comes along later, at link time.
You have two options:
Add a function, which you declare in location.h and define in location.c, which does the necessary malloc and returns a pointer.
Move the full definition of the struct to the header file.
The main file knows about a struct called Location_Struct (and a typedef). It has no idea how big it is, thus you can't apply sizeof to it.
Since you are effectively hiding the layout and the implementation of Location_Struct it makes sense to provide a "constructor" that allocates it.
EDIT
It seems I have to mention that by "constructor" I mean an ordinary function that has access to the implementation of the structure and can allocate and possibly pre-populate the object.
You need to put the definition of Location_Struct in the header file location.h. The compiler would not "see" the other source file (unless it were #include'd, which would not typically be a good idea).

Error: In C, got the error "dereferencing pointer to incomplete type" in a struct pointer

Hello Everybody!
I got the following error, while trying to test a code for the game Clever Frog:
error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
The 'full code' is at pastebin.com - here (won't expire). But I think that with the explanation below, anybody can understands. Note: I haven't implemented yet the function that will erase the allocated memory and other things.
I have a struct defined in a 1.c file:
#include "1.h"
...
struct test {
int a;
};
...
I have a 1.h wicth have the typedef using it:
...
typedef struct test testT;
...
Then I have a function that has a parameter in it depending on testT, wich is in 2.c:
...
void funcTest(testT **t, int *size, ..){
/* another function that creates mem.space/alocate memory based enter code here`on the need of size above */
createMem(t,*size); /* void createMem(testT **t, int size); */
t[0]->a = 0; /*ERROR HERE*/
/* ... more code ... */
}
...
The 2.h file is like this:
...
void funcTest(testT **t, int *size, ..);
...
I will pass a testT *var as the way below, at the main programam:
...
testT *varTest; int size;
funcTest(&varTest, &size);
...
The bizarre thing is that the code compile when I use struct test at 1.h file (removing struct test from 1.c - which is wrong). But, when running the compiled program, exactly where the error occurs is the place of t[0]->a.
I already tried 'everything' but nothing worked :( I have faith that is something very stupid, so if anybody knows something, please tell me :D
Thanks!
When you try to access the a member of the t[0] struct the compiler needs to know how this struct looks like (for example to see if there even is any a member in it). Since you didn't put the struct test type definition anywhere where the compiler can see it when compiling 2.c, you get an error. The compiler doesn't know what a struct test contains.
If you put the definition of the struct test in 1.h, the compiler sees how that type looks like and can use the struct members.
Just put the complete type definition in 1.h, that's where it's supposed to be.
Somewhere you have a preprocessed file that has
typedef struct test testT;
Which doesn't include
struct test {
int a;
};
Preprocessing inlines all the #includes directives. As long as you were only using a testT pointer, the compiler would have known to "allocate a pointer's worth of memory" and the compilation would have progressed further than expected.
When you actually try to use that pointer to dereference something, the compiler would then realize it NEEDED the full definition of "struct test" and you would get the error displayed.
If you want the struct to be usable both in 1.c and 2.c, it must be defined in a header file that is visible to both. I don't know why you say that this is "wrong", it's common practice and AFAIK there is no other way around that directly.
If it's only defined in 1.c, then the compiler has no idea if struct test has a member named "a" when processing 2.c.
Another option is to just keep the forward declaration as you have now, but also include accessor/mutator functions in the header. Then 2.c does not have to know about the "internals" of struct test, but can act on it. This is also very common in C APIs.
(You could also define the struct identically both in 1.c and 2.c but that's a very bad idea.)
The definition of struct Test is only visible inside the file 1.c. The code t[0]->a doesn't see that this struct has a member named a. The types shared between several compile units shuld be defined in a header!
You should know that C/C++ compiles each .c file separately, so it has no way to know that the structure is defined in some other .c file.
You should perhaps do the following:
(1.h)
struct test {
int a;
};
...
(1.c)
#include "1.h"
...
(2.c)
#include "1.h"
...
void funcTest(testT **t, int *size, ..){
createMem(t,*size); /* void createMem(testT **t, int size); */
t[0]->a = 0;
/* ... more code ... */
}
But, when running the compiled program, exactly where the error occurs is the place of t[0]->a.
The pointer to the allocated memory is actually in *t, not t (as seen from your createMatrix code at Pastebin), so you should really be doing:
(*t)[0].a
and similarly in your for loop:
(*matriz)[i].row

Resources