I am writing a C99 library that is distributed among several files, e.g.
// core.h
void my_private_fn();
void API_my_public_fn();
// core.c
#include "core.h"
void my_private_fn() {
do_something();
}
void API_my_public_fn() {
do_something_else();
}
// module_a.h
#include "core.h"
void API_useful_thing();
// module_a.c
#include "module_a.h"
void API_useful_thing() {
my_private_fn();
}
I want only the API_ prefixed functions to be visible by a program using the library, but I also need to expose my_private_fn in core.h in order to be used by module_a.c. Is there a way in C to make my_private_fn only visible within the library?
If the function had to only be visible in the compilation unit where it is defined, then you could declare it static. Because C language offers few possible scopes: a symbol can have only 3 scopes:
local to a block (the block can be a function or a block inside a function)
static scope (static declaration outside of a function): the symbol is only visible in the compilation unit where it is declared
global scope (non-static declaration outside of a function): the symbol is visible throughout the whole program.
At most, you can hide the declaration in a private include file that you do not declare in the official documented API. That way obedient users should not use it. But you cannot prevent users to put the declaration in their own code and use the function.
Put them in an internal header file that's only used inside the library and not distributed to end users—say, core_internal.h.
I found a neater way to lay out my code building upon Serge's answer that I selected, whose most merit goes to.
The key is to put the "private" functions in headers that are only included in C files, not in header files. This way the "private" symbols are available internally but not to an external caller. In a complete example:
core.h:
void my_public_fn();
core_priv.h:
void my_private_fn();
core.c:
#include <stdio.h>
#include "core.h"
#include "core_priv.h"
void my_private_fn() {
printf("Private function called.\n");
}
void my_public_fn() {
printf("Public function called.\n");
}
module_a.h:
#include "core.h"
void module_a_fn();
module_a.c:
#include "core_priv.h"
#include "module_a.h"
void module_a_fn() {
my_private_fn();
my_public_fn();
}
And if we want, we can group possibly multiple modules in a common library header.
library.h:
#include "module_a.h"
// etc.
This way, a program using the library only needs to include one file with only:
main.c:
#include "library.h"
int main() {
//my_private_fn(); // This triggers a compile warning.
my_public_fn(); // I can still reach the "core" public function.
module_a_fn(); // This calls the "private" function internally.
return 0;
}
Compiling with gcc -Wall *.c -o main.o and executing ./main.o yields:
Public function called.
Private function called.
Public function called.
Related
I have 2 files: Sod/iload/iload.c and
Item/itemrule/itemrule.c, and I want to access a variable defined in iload.c which is defined in itemrule.c.
To do this, I made and defined a global variable in iload.c, and I tried to access this variable in itemrule .c with the extern keyword, but it is always 0.
I'm worried that it might be because the files have different paths, does anyone know how I can access this variable?
The usual idiom is to use an extern declaration in a header file and include that wherever the global is needed.
// foo.h
// Make the global visible in any C file that includes this header.
extern int my_global_var;
// foo.c
#include "foo.h" // Not really needed here, but fine.
int my_global_var;
...
// bar.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include "foo.h" // This one makes the global visible in the rest of the file.
void do_something(void) {
printf("my global var's value is: %d\n", my_global_var);
}
Note that using globals like this in a program of any significant size or complexity can lead to messy, bug-prone, and hard-to-change code. Not a great pattern to follow.
I would like to offer an alternative to Gene's answer. In my experience there are two main ways to share variables across modules (compilation units):
1) "Getters and Setters".
2) Externs.
Depending on what kind of team you're working with, they'll have a preference for one or the other. C functions by default have external linkage; you need to force internal linkage via the static keyword in front of the function name if you don't want this.
1) Getters and Setters:
// foo.c
#include <stdio.h>
int my_global_var = 0;
...
Then you can follow it with externally-linked getters and setters. i.e.:
int get_my_global_var(void)
{
return my_global_var;
}
void set_my_global_var(int var)
{
my_global_var = var;
}
This is done within the c file (module). It will be the getters and setters will be able to be called from any other module and they will get and set the global variable my_global_var.
2) Externs:
// foo.c
#include <stdio.h>
int my_global_var = 0;
...
An alternative to getters and setters is to use externs. In this case you add nothing extra to the module that contains the global variable you wish to access/modify (my_global_var).
// bar.c
#include <stdio.h>
extern int my_global_var;
...
Notice the syntax here; when we use the extern keyword, we don't initialize it as anything. We are simply infoming the compiler that the global variable my_global_var has external linkage.
I'm in the process of writing a library that provides a sha256 implementation. The library will be given to vendors that may want to provide their own sha256 functions that are optimized for their platform. So, the API of this library allows the client to pass in function pointers to their sha256 code.
int mylib_set_sha256_impl( /* function pointers */ );
Henceforth, all algorithms will use the function pointers provided internally instead of the stock sha256 code provided by the library.
The question is: how can I facilitate dead code removal during link time, such that the default sha256 implementation in this library is removed??
This is an API design question as much as it is a compiler-optimization question.
There are no special requirement as far as linker is concerned, and no weak aliasing need be considered.
The basic rule is: As long as the user code doesn't reference any symbols in a given .c or .s file that you linked into your library, the said file's contents won't end up in the executable.
In the scenario you describe, your functions may never become dead code since your "live" code perhaps references their addresses to set up default function pointer values. To make sure that doesn't happen, you have to do the following:
Refer to the replaceable functions only from within a user-callable optional default_init function.
The default_init must never be called anywhere in your code, neither must any of the functions be referenced anywhere but within default_init.
Have the replaceable functions, and the init function, put into at least one .c or assembly file that is not used for any of the other code.
For your user to replace all the functions, they simply have to never call the default_init function. If you wish functions to be replaceable one-by-one, you have to, additionally:
Have each replaceable function in its own .c file.
Have the user not call the default_init directly, but pass the desired default or user-provided implementations to your init function.
What you're doing, in effect, isn't "overwriting" any implementation, but simply not using it at all.
Example (include guards omitted for clarity):
// api.h
void api_fun1(void);
void api_fun2(void);
void api_default_init(void);
void api_user_init(void (*f1)(void), void (*f2)(void));
void api_use_funs(void);
// api_internal.h
extern void (*api_f1)(void);
extern void (*api_f2)(void);
// common.c
#include "api.h"
#include "api_internal.h"
void (*api_f1)(void);
void (*api_f2)(void);
void api_user_init(void (*f1)(void), void (*f2)(void)) {
api_f1 = f1;
api_f2 = f2;
}
void api_use_funs(void) {
api_f1();
api_f2();
}
// api_fun1.c
#include "api.h"
void api_fun1(void) {}
// api_fun2.c
#include "api.h"
void api_fun2(void) {}
// api_default_init.c
#include "api.h"
#include "api_internal.h"
void api_default_init(void) {
api_f1 = api_fun1;
api_f2 = api_fun2;
}
Let's say that the user wants to override api_fun2 with their own:
// main.c
#include "api.h"
#include <stdio.h>
void my_fun2() {
printf("%s\n", __FUNCTION__);
}
int main() {
api_user_init(api_fun1, my_fun2);
api_use_funs();
}
In one interview I was asked, if in one file A, some static function is defined and in file B you want to use this static function -- how you will use it?
My answers were:
declaring in .h file
But if we declare that in a header file, other files which will include this also have access to this static function.
wrapper concept: Declaring a new function newfun in file A, which will call static function and calling this newfun in file B.
But he was not satisfied with these answers.
Can you please provide me some better solution to violate static.
Perhaps they wanted to hear about function pointers?
You can create a pointer to the function, and call it using that pointer.
One possible scenario where this is reasonable is if you have a callback function that you don't want to be callable by everyone, and you give the pointer as an argument to some register_callback function.
Callback functions were used extensively, for example to let the user of a GUI API provide code for what should happen when a button is pressed. Nowadays, with object-oriented languages, it is more common to subclass a class and define or override methods, such as the Android View class and the method OnClickListener, but C# delegates are very similar to C function pointers.
To illustrate the principle, here is the source code (the file "B" in the original question) for some sort of library, where the main component is the do_stuff function:
#include <stdio.h>
#include "some_library.h"
void (*stored_callback)(void) = NULL;
void register_callback(void (*callback)(void)) {
stored_callback = callback;
}
void do_stuff(void) {
printf("Doing stuff...\n");
printf("Calling callback...\n");
if (stored_callback != NULL)
stored_callback();
}
This header, some_library.h, file shows the API of that library:
extern void register_callback(void (*callback)(void));
extern void do_stuff(void);
And here is how the library is used (the file "A" in the question):
#include <stdio.h>
#include "some_library.h"
static void my_callback(void) {
printf("Inside the callback!\n");
}
int main(void) {
register_callback(my_callback);
do_stuff();
return 0;
}
My interview answer would be "You can't."
(Because the question says "in file B you want to use this static function" and it didn't say you are allowed to modify file A.)
I'm assuming you don't have access to the source of the static function or else you could just remove the static keyword or expose the function via an exported wrapper or global function pointer.
You can still use the static function if you use objcopy to manually change the visibility on the symbol in the object file / library.
Suppose this is the (unaccessible) static function:
//static.c
#include <stdio.h>
static void fun(){
puts("Hello world");
}
Suppose you only have static.o, obtainable with gcc -c static.c.
Now, let's assume you want to link static.o with main.o made from
//main.c
void fun();
void main(){
fun();
};
To be able to link it, you need to turn
$ nm static.o
0000000000000000 t fun
U puts
into
0000000000000000 T fun
U puts
You can do that with:
objcopy --globalize-symbol=fun static.o global.o
Now you can link with global.o instead of static.o.
$ gcc main.o global.o && ./a.out
Hello world
filea.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include "filea.h"
static void hidden(void) { printf("inside hidden function.\n"); }
fxptr unhide(void) { return hidden; }
filea.h
#ifndef FILEA_INCLUDED
#define FILEA_INCLUDED
typedef void(*fxptr)(void);
fxptr unhide(void);
#endif
fileb.c
#include "filea.h"
int main(void) {
unhide()();
return 0;
}
I read that
A function with internal linkage is only visible to one compilation
unit. (...) A function declared static has internal linkage
For .c files it sorta makes sense, but I was wondering what happens with static functions in headers, which get included by multiple .c files but usually have an include guard.
I was reading this answer about static functions in headers, and the first item mentions that it doesn't create a symbol with external linkage and the second item mentions the function is available purely through the header file. Isn't that contradictory? How can the function be available and at the same time have no external symbol? So I did a little test:
/* 1.h */
#ifndef ONE_H
#define ONE_H
#include <stdio.h>
static void foo() {
printf("foo from 1.h %p\n", foo);
return;
}
void bar();
#endif
/* 1.c */
#include "1.h"
#include <stdio.h>
void bar() {
printf("foo,bar from 1.c %p,%p\n", foo, bar);
foo();
}
/* 2.c */
#include "1.h"
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
printf("foo,bar from main %p,%p\n", foo, bar);
foo();
bar();
return 0;
}
...
debian#pc:~ gcc 2.c 1.c
debian#pc:~ ./a.out
foo,bar from main 0x400506,0x400574
foo from 1.h 0x400506
foo,bar from 1.c 0x400559,0x400574
foo from 1.h 0x400559
As expected bar is the same across all files, but shouldn't foo be too? Isn't 1.h included only once? Adding inline to foo resulted in the same behavior. I'm kinda lost.
Read here, how a header file basically works. That should clarify about your actual question.
Briefly: A header file is just inserted instead of the corresponding #include directive. So any declarations or definitions are treated by the compiler as if you actually copy/pasted the text into your file.
Anyway, you should be careful with function definitions in a header. This is deemed bad style in general. It blows the code for instance, creating redundant copies of that function. Also Function pointers cannot be compared (you never know ...). It is often better to bundle the functions into a library with just the declarations in a header (non-static then: external linkage). There are good justifications sometimes, however (no rule without exceptions). One of them are inline functions.
-static functions are functions that are only visible to other functions in the same file (more precisely the same translation unit).
Check this article for a detailed explanation on linkage: http://publications.gbdirect.co.uk/c_book/chapter4/linkage.html
I was told that a function defined as static in one .c file is not accessible from other files. But in the following program, I can access the static void show() function from another file. Is my understanding of static functions in C wrong?
a.h (first file):
static void show()
{
printf("I am in static show function in a.c");
}
b.c (another file):
#include"a.h"
void main()
{
show();
}
Remember that #includes work by copy-and-pasting the content of the included file. So in your example, after the #include has been processed, you get this:
static void show()
{
printf("I am in static show function in a.c");
}
void main()
{
show();
}
So clearly main can see show.1
The solution is to not #include .c files. In general, you should only #include header (.h) files. Your static functions shouldn't be declared or defined in the header file, so main will not be able to see it.
1. However, you now actually have two definitions of the show function, one in a.c and one in b.c. For static functions, this isn't a problem, but for non-static functions you would get a linker error.
static keyword changes the linkage specification to Internal Linkage.
A function marked as static will only be visible in that Translation Unit(TU).
Perhaps, You have same named symbols available in that particular TU, where you access the function. The how part of it can be only answered after you show us the code.
EDIT:
When you define a static function in header file, A copy of the same function gets created in every Translation Unit where you include it.Each instance of such a function is treated as a separate function(address of each function is different) and each instance of these functions have their own copies of static local variables & string literals.
Clearly, this will work but this might as well increase the size of your generated binary.
The other answers are correct, but it's not quite accurate to say that the static function is not accessible from another file. It is possible to access the function through a function pointer. It would be more accurate to say that the name of the function is not accessible in another translation unit.
Remember that converting C source code to an executable program consists of conceptual stages, including:
preprocessing (in which #include directives are replaced with the contents of the included file
compilation (which processes one translation unit at a time)
linking (in which the translation units are put together into the final program)
Suppose we have three files. foo.h:
typedef void (*void_function_p)(void);
extern void_function_p foo(void);
foo.c:
#include "foo.h"
#include <stdio.h>
static void baz(void) {
printf("worked!\n");
}
void_function_p foo(void) {
return baz;
}
bar.c:
#include "foo.h"
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
(*foo())();
return 0;
}
This program compiles and prints "worked!" when it runs.
There are two translation units here. One is the code in the preprocessed foo.c (which, because of how #include works also includes the code in foo.h and stdio.h). The other is the code in the preprocessed bar.c (which, again, has its own copy of the code in foo.h and stdio.h).
By having the function foo return a pointer to the static function baz, we are able to call baz from the main function.
Now, consider what happens if we modify main to look like this:
int main(void) {
(*foo())();
baz();
return 0;
}
This code will result in a linker error because the name baz in this translation unit cannot be linked to the definition of baz in the other translation unit.
This is the first advantage of static functions: another programmer cannot accidentally access our baz function from another translation unit.
Now, consider what happens if we modify bar.c to look like this:
#include "foo.h"
#include <stdio.h>
static void baz(void) {
printf("still works!");
}
int main() {
(*foo())();
baz();
return 0;
}
This code will compile, and print "worked!" followed by "still works!"
This is the second advantage of static functions: we've defined two functions (in different translation units) with the same name.
If you try to put both static definitions in the same translation unit, you will get a compiler error about defining baz twice.
As a final note, if you take the program as it now stands and remove all the statics, it will result in a linker error because baz has been defined twice (with external linkage), which is not permitted.