#include<stdio.h>
int g(int *a, int *b);
int main()
{
int a = 2;
int b = 7;
b = g(&b , &a);
printf("a = %d\n", a);
printf("b = %d\n", b);
return 0;
}
int g(int *a, int *b)
{
(*a) = (*a) + 3;
(*b) = 2*(*a) - (*b)+5;
printf("a = %d, b = %d\n", *a, *b);
return (*a)+(*b);
}
The output is:
a = 10, b = 23
a = 23
b = 33
I'm in an Intro to C programming class and having trouble understanding how this works.
Thanks for the help!
Sequencing the events as presented in question:
int main()
{
Declaration of a and b and value assignment:
int a = 2;
int b = 7;
Here is a trick, the address passed to the parameter int* a is actually of b, and vice-versa on the second parameter:
b = g(&b , &a);
Here just printing values of a and b:
printf("a = %d\n", a);
printf("b = %d\n", b);
return 0;
}
Since the parameters are pointers, the changes made, in the scope of this function, to the variable addresses pointed by them are permanent:
int g(int *a, int *b) {
Here, dereferencing the pointer (*a, the parentheses are not needed in these cases), means you are now working with the value stored in the address pointed by a, so 7 + 3 = 10, now the value stored in the address pointed by a is = 10:
(*a) = (*a) + 3;
Here, the same thing, dereferencing pointers, so 2 * 10 - 2 + 5 = 23, the value stored in the address pointed by b will be 23:
(*b) = 2*(*a) - (*b)+5;
Here printing a = 10 and b = 23, again, dereferencing pointers means you are working with the values stored in the addresses pointed by them:
printf("a = %d, b = %d\n", *a, *b);
The returned value is 10 + 23 = 33, so for b = g(&b, &a), b will be assigned the value of 33, a is already 23 so it stays that way:
return (*a)+(*b);
}
Remember that C passes all function arguments by value - that means that the formal parameter in the function body is a separate object in memory from the actual parameter in the function call, and the value of the actual parameter is copied to the formal parameter.
For any function to modify the value of a parameter, you must pass a pointer to that parameter:
void foo( T *ptr ) // for any type T
{
*ptr = new_T_value(); // write a new value to the thing ptr points to
}
void bar( void )
{
T var;
foo( &var ); // write a new value to var
}
In the code above, all of the following are true:
ptr == &var
*ptr == var
Thus, when you write a new value to the expression *ptr, it's the same as writing a new value to var.
I think part of what's making this confusing for you is that the names of your formal parameters (a and b) and your pointers (a and b) are flipped - g:a points to main:b and vice versa.
g:a == &main:b // I'm using g: and main: here strictly to disambiguate
*g:a == main:b // which a and b I'm talking about - this is not based on
// any real C syntax.
g:b == &main:a
*g:b == main:a
With & you give the address of the variable to the function, instead of the value.
With * you can access the value of an address.
With b = g(&b , &a); you give the address of the variable b and a to the function.
But you can access the address of b with * a because you declare the function that way: int g (int * a, int * b):
*a points to the address of your b variable.
*b points to the address of your a variable.
I think the different variable names are what confuses you.
To make it easier for yourself you could change the declaration to int g (int * b, int * a)
In case you want to change it:
*b would point to the address of your b variable and
*a would point to the address of your a variable.
by using the * you access the object referenced by the pointer. As the pointers are referencing int variables a & b you do the operations on those variables. I think the same variable names are confusing you
int g(int *p1, int *p2)
{
(*p1) = (*p1) + 3;
(*p2) = 2*(*p1) - (*p2)+5;
printf("*p1 = %d, *p2 = %d\n", *p1, *p2);
return (*p1)+(*p2);
}
Related
I am solving the problem of swapping the value of two variables. I need to do it using a helper function. Now I've been studying the call-by-value and call-by-reference stuff.
My only confusion is when I'm passing the arguments to the swap function, why am I sending the address(&a, &b)? What actually happens when I'm sending the address instead of the value itself?
Here's the code
#include <stdio.h>
void swap(int a, int b) {
int temp;
temp = a;
a = b;
b = temp;
printf("After swapping values in function(using call by value) a = %d, b = %d\n",a,b);
}
void swapref(int *a, int *b) {
int temp2;
temp2 = *a;
*a=*b;
*b=temp2;
printf("After swapping values in function(using call by reference) a = %d, b = %d\n",*a,*b);
}
int main() {
int a = 10, b = 20;
printf("Before swapping the values in main a = %d, b = %d\n",a,b);
swap(a,b);
printf("After swapping values in main(using call by value) a = %d, b = %d\n",a,b);
swapref(&a,&b); // <-- This is the line I'm talking about
printf("After swapping values in main(using call by reference) a = %d, b = %d\n",a,b);
return 0;
}
In the above code, what actually happens in the swapref(&a, &b) line?
Passing the address is different than giving the value since you passe the exact memory case where your original variable (a and b) are stored. Like :
void swapref(int *a, int *b)
So when in the function you modify those value, you change the original ones.
Whereas passing variables values like :
void swap(int a, int b)
You're passing a copy of each variable, so the originals won't be touched.
swap() parameters are passed by copy, while swapref() ones are passed by reference (i.e. you pass the variable memory address, instead of its content).
* operator returns the value-pointed-to of a variable
& operator returns the address-of a variable
To better understand what happens, I suggest you to print their addresses
void swap(int a, int b) {
int temp;
temp = a;
a = b;
b = temp;
printf("After swapping values in function (using call by value) [%p]a = %d, [%p]b = %d\n", &a, a, &b, b);
}
void swapref(int* a, int* b) {
int temp;
temp = *a;
*a = *b;
*b = temp;
printf("After swapping values in function (using call by reference) [%p]a = %d, [%p]b = %d\n", &(*a), *a, &(*b), *b);
}
int main()
{
int a = 10, b = 20;
printf("Before swapping the values in main [%p]a = %d, [%p]b = %d\n", &a, a, &b, b);
swap(a, b);
printf("After swapping values in main (using call by value) [%p]a = %d, [%p]b = %d\n", &a, a, &b, b);
swapref(&a, &b); // <-- This is the line I'm talking about
printf("After swapping values in main (using call by reference) [%p]a = %d, [%p]b = %d\n", &a, a, &b, b);
return 0;
}
Output:
Before swapping the values in main [000000A6B03BF834]a = 10, [000000A6B03BF854]b = 20
After swapping values in function(using call by value) [000000A6B03BF800]a = 20, [000000A6B03BF808]b = 10
After swapping values in main(using call by value) [000000A6B03BF834]a = 10, [000000A6B03BF854]b = 20
After swapping values in function(using call by reference) [000000A6B03BF834]a = 20, [000000A6B03BF854]b = 10
After swapping values in main(using call by reference) [000000A6B03BF834]a = 20, [000000A6B03BF854]b = 10
As you can notice, the variables used in swapref() present the same addresses as the ones that are passed to the function.
As you can see by the output of your program:
After swapping values in function(using call by value) a = 20, b = 10
After swapping values in main(using call by value) a = 10, b = 20
After swapping values in function(using call by reference) a = 20, b = 10
After swapping values in main(using call by reference) a = 20, b = 10
The variables are not actually swapped. Whenever passing a something as a parameter, its value is copied into the argument.
void by_val(int i) {
i = 2;
// the variable i in main will NOT be changed,
// because this one is a copy
}
void by_ptr(int* i) {
// This will change the i in main, because we didn't copy its value,
// but copied the memory address of i variable in main.
*i = 2;
// Now we can make i point to an other variable than the main function i.
// This will not update i, but it will update num.
int num = 2;
i = #
*i = 3;
}
int main() {
int i = 1;
by_val(i);
printf("%d\n", i); // "1"
by_ptr(&i);
printf("%d\n", i); // "2"
}
So in your first swap function, the values of the copies of (main) a and b are being swapped, not the values of (main) a and b. But in your second function, the values of (main) a and b are swapped, because you passed the memory addresses of the (main). The * operator makes the program use the values in the variables, the memory address is pointing to.
It doesn't help that you're using the same names for different things. For the purpose of this answer, we're going to assume the variables in main are named x and y instead:
int main( void )
{
int x = 10, y = 20;
...
swap(x, y);
...
swapref(&x, &y);
...
}
That will make the following discussion easier to follow.
The formal parameters a and b in swap are different objects in memory from the local variables x and y in main.
When you call
swap(x, y);
in main, the expressions x and y are fully evaluated and the results of those evaluations (10 and 20, respectively) are passed to swap and copied into its formal arguments.
Since a and b are different objects from x and y, exchanging the values of a and b has no effect on the values of x and y.
Just like with swap, the formal parameters a and b in swapref are different objects in memory from the local variables x and y. When you call
swapref(&x, &y);
the expressions &x and &y are fully evaluated, and the results of those evaluations (the addresses of x and y) are passed to swapref and copied into the formal arguments a and b.
This means the following relationships are true:
a == &x // int * == int *
*a == x // int == int
b == &y // int * == int *
*b == y // int == int
Again, since a and b in swapref are different objects in memory from x and y in main, changing the values of a and b in swapref has no effect on x and y. However, when you write new values to the expressions *a and *b in swapref, you're not changing the values of a and b but rather what a and b point to, which in this case is x and y.
You can kinda-sorta think of *a and *b as aliases for x and y - they're alternate names for the same objects. Writing
temp = *a;
*a = *b;
*b = temp;
is equivalent to writing
temp = x;
x = y;
y = temp;
I am a newbie in the C language and learning it. I am learning the pointers. I am confused a little about the following program.
My question is it even possible to get the outcome B ever? I am changing the value of a but accordingly, the value of b gets changed due to the pointer and I am always just getting outcome A. How can I get outcome B? Any help will be really appreciated. Thanks :)
#include <stdio.h>
void increment(int value) {
value++;
}
int main() {
int a = 6;
int *b = &a;
increment(a);
if(a == *b) {
printf("outcome A");
} else if(a > *b) {
printf("outcome B");
} else {
printf("outcome C");
} return 0;
}
A pointer is an object in many programming languages that stores a memory address. A pointer references a location in memory, and obtaining the value stored at that location is known as dereferencing the pointer
Take a look at this code snippet
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
int a = 6;
int *b = &a;
printf("a = %d b = %p *b = %d\n", a, (void*)b, *b);
a = 20;
printf("a = %d b = %p *b = %d\n", a, (void*)b, *b);
}
Output:
a = 6 b = 0x7fff3ead8d6c *b = 6
a = 20 b = 0x7fff3ead8d6c *b = 20
As you can see, assigning a new value to a did not change the value of b. It did change the value pointed to by b, however. That is, b did not change, while *b did.
I would like help understanding this code:
void F (int a, int *b)
{
a = 7 ;
*b = a ;
*b = 4 ;
printf("%d, %d\n", a, *b);
b = &a ;
}
int main()
{
int m = 3, n = 5;
F(m, &n) ;
printf("%d, %d\n", m, n) ;
return 0;
}
I am confused why this does not result in unexpected behavior. At the end of the function F, the value of b is 7. But when I return it is clear that nothing after ' b = &a ' impacts the value of n/b.
I thought that pointing to a local variable would result in garbage/unexpected behavior when the scope changed, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
When you call F, you pass the value of m and the address of n.
In F, b is a pointer to n so that when you change the value of *b, the value of n is changed. However, in "b = &a;" you are changing where b points. After that line, b no longer points to n. Instead, it points to a. That line does nothing at all to the variable n back in main(). After that point, if you change the value of *b, you will change the value of *b and its alias, a. It will not change the value of n in main.
At the end of the function F, the value of b is 7
The value of b is not 7; b is set to point to a, which has the value of 7
But when I return it is clear that nothing after b = &a impacts the value of n
Although b is a pointer, it is passed by value. b inside F behaves as if it were a separate, fully independent, local variable. Any modifications to it made inside F are local to F.
In fact, you cannot trigger undefined behavior in main by actions inside F, because main is not receiving any pointers from F. If you want to make undefined behavior, pass a pointer to pointer into F, and assign it to point to a local variable:
void CauseUB(int a, int **b) {
*b = &a;
}
int main() {
int x = 5, *y = &x;
printf("This is OK: %d\n", *y);
CauseUB(x, &y); // Pointer to pointer
printf("This is UB: %d\n", *y);
return 0;
}
Demo.
static void swapAddr(int *numOne, int *numTwo)
{
int *tmp;
tmp = numOne;
numOne = numTwo;
numTwo = tmp;
}
int main(void)
{
int a = 15;
int b = 10;
printf("a is: %d\n", a);
printf("Address of a: %p\n", &a);
printf("b is: %d\n", b);
printf("Address of b: %p\n", &b);
swapAddr(&a, &b);
printf("\n");
printf("a is: %d\n", a);
printf("Address of a: %p\n", &a);
printf("b is: %d\n", b);
printf("Address of b: %p\n", &b);
return 0;
}
When I compile and run this piece of code, the output is
a is: 15
Address of a: 0x7fff57f39b98
b is: 10
Address of b: 0x7fff57f39b94
a is: 15
Address of a: 0x7fff57f39b98
b is: 10
Address of b: 0x7fff57f39b94
Clearly the result is not what I intended, since the address does not seem to have been swapped at all.
You generally can't change the address of a variable.
Your 'swapAddr' function changes its parameter values, but these are local to the function - you're not changing anything outside the function. Perhaps the best way of understanding it is that a function parameter always receives a copy of the value that was passed to the function. In this case, you get a copy of the address of a and a copy of the address of b. You can and do change the values of the variables holding those copies (numOne and numTwo), and seeing as they are pointers you could (but don't) change the values that they point at (the values of variables a and b) - but you can't change the addresses of the original variables.
To break it down:
static void swapAddr(int *numOne, int *numTwo)
{
int *tmp;
tmp = numOne;
At this point, tmp and numOne both point to the value of the a variable...
numOne = numTwo;
Now, numOne points instead to the value of the b variable...
numTwo = tmp;
}
And finally, numTwo now points to the value of the a variable. The function returns and numOne and numTwo no longer exist after that point. The addresses of the variables a and b did not change at any stage.
You could however write a function which exchanges the addresses in two pointer variables:
static void swapAddr(int **ptrOne, int **ptrTwo)
{
int *tmp;
tmp = *ptrOne;
*ptrOne = *ptrTwo;
*ptrTwo = tmp;
}
This would allow you to pass the address of two pointer variables, and on return the pointers would be swapped - each one pointing at what the other did previously. But again, this would not change the address of any variable that those pointers happened to point to.
The pointers are passed to the function by value, so changing what they point to isn't going to change the value of the passed parameters in the calling function.
When the function is called, a copy of each pointer is made and saved to the stack. Then the function reads each pointer value off the stack and manipulates them. It never changes the value of the original pointer that was copied onto the stack.
Remember that in C values are passed by value to functions, meaning that the values are copied. When you modify an argument in a function you only modify the local copy inside the function, not the original value that was passed to the function. This goes for pointers as well.
To solve your problem you must pass the arguments by reference, but unfortunately C doesn't have that, it only have pass by value. However, pass by reference can be emulated by passing pointers to the data, just like you do in the function. You must however dereference the pointer to get the values from where the pointers point to, and use those values to do the actual swapping:
int temp = *numOne; // Note: temp is a value not a pointer
*numOne = *numTwo;
*numTwo = temp;
static void swapAddr(int *numOne, int *numTwo)
In this function you are passing 2 pointers by value. This allows you to modify the int pointed to by the pointers but not the pointers themselves.
Use this function definition instead that passes pointers to pointers and allows modifying the pointers themselves
static void swapAddr(int **numOne, int **numTwo) {
int *tmp = *numOne;
numOne = *numTwo;
numTwo = tmp;
}
You could use it like this for example:
int *a = malloc(sizeof(int));
int *b = malloc(sizeof(int));
*a = 15;
*b = 10;
swapAddr(&a, &b);
You canlt change the addresses. The adderss of a is the address of a and that will remain the same until the end of days.
You can do:
static void swapAddr(int **numOne, int **numTwo)
{
int *tmp;
tmp = *numOne;
*numOne = *numTwo;
*numTwo = tmp;
}
int main(void)
{
int a = 15;
int b = 10;
int *pa= &a;
int *pb= &b;
swapAddr(&pa, &pb);
}
What you want to achieve is something like
int *c = &a;
&a = &b;
&b = &a;
This is not possible (you can check: it will not compile). A variable that is created is placed at one place in memory and stays there. So when you create a variable a it will stay variable a and it will not be able to change its identity to that of another variable b.
What you can do is use two pointers int *p1, *p2 to int. These pointers can change their value and point to other objects during lifetime:
p1 = a;
p2 = b;
p1 = b;
p2 = a;
a and b will stay the same, but p1 and p2 can point to different objects over time.
So a thing that would be possible:
static void swapaddr(int **pp1, int **pp2)
{
int *pp;
pp = *pp1;
*pp1 = *pp2;
*pp2 = pp;
}
int main(void)
{
int a = 15, b = 10;
int *pA = &a, *pB = &b;
swapAddr(&pA, &pB);
}
In this example a and b would keep their identity and address, but pA and pB would change their value and pA would point to b and pB would point to pA.
You cannot change the addresses of the variables.however you can change values of pointers,which store addresses as their value,here is an example :
#include <stdio.h>
void swapAddr(int **numOne, int **numTwo)
{
int *tmp;
tmp = *numOne;
*numOne = *numTwo;
*numTwo = tmp;
}
int main(void)
{
int a = 15;
int b = 10;
int *p_a = &a;
int *p_b = &b;
printf("Address of a: %p\n", p_a);
printf("Address of b: %p\n", p_b);
swapAddr(&p_a,&p_b);
printf("\n");
printf("p_a : %p\n",p_a);
printf("p_b : %p\n",p_b);
return 0;
}
I am trying to better understand pointers and referencing in C, and my course provided the following program as an example.
#include <stdio.h>
void swap(int* a, int* b);
int main(void)
{
int x = 1;
int y = 2;
swap(&x, &y);
printf("x is %i\n", x);
printf("y is %i\n", y);
}
void swap(int* a, int* b)
{
int tmp = *a;
*a = *b;
*b = tmp;
}
I shambled together the following to see if it would help me understand better what's happening, mainly in regards to the need to use & versus *(dereference). Basically, the syntax of declaring a pointer to int type (int* a) versus using an asterisk to "dereference" (*a = *b) is quite confusing to me, and I was hoping someone could enlighten me. Here's another version of the above that I thought would help clarify, but really doesn't:
#include <stdio.h>
void swap(int* a, int* b);
int main(void)
{
int x = 1;
int y = 2;
int *a = &x;
int *b = &y;
swap(a, b);
printf("x is %i\n", x);
printf("y is %i\n", y);
}
void swap(int* a, int* b)
{
int tmp = *a;
*a = *b;
*b = tmp;
}
In short, my question is, is there a functional difference between what these two programs are doing? What is the difference between a dereference (*a = *b) versus using the & operator (*a = &x)".
You're confusing declaration and assignment.
*a = *bis called assignment. Notice it does not include a type name.
int *a = &x on the other hand is called declaration. Notice that you initialize the pointer with the address of x. You are not dereferencing the pointer, but are declaring it as a pointer to int.
Look at this:
int main() {
int a = 5;
int b = 2;
int *c = &a; // c when dereferenced equals 5; **Declaration**
int *d = &b; // d when dereferenced equals 2; **Declaration**
int tmp = *c; // tmp equals 5
*c = *d; // c when dereferenced now equals 2 **Assignment**
*d = tmp; // d when dereferenced now equals 5 **Assignment**
return 0;
}
Finally, when you declare and initialize a pointer in the same statement, you assign the pointer the address of what you want to have point at it. When you want to change the value the object points to, you dereference it using *. On the other hand, if you want to change what it points to, you do not dereference it.
&xreturns the address of x. x is of type integer and a is of type pointer to integer. In this case, (*a = &x), you are assigning the address of x to a variable of type "pointer to integer", which is a. (*a = *b) is a assign operation between two variables of the same type which is integer. I said integer because even though a and b are "pointers to integers", in that operation they are dereferenced and therefore the integer value to which these are pointed to is read.
The confusion I think you have is because (*a = &x) only makes sense during a pointer initialization.
If you set *a = *b since a and b are pointer variables, the * operator will retrieve the value of a cell in memory that b points to it and puts it to the cell that a points to it.
For *a = &x, the & operator finds the address of the cell that allocated to the x variable, and puts it in the cell that a points to it.
In short, my question is, is there a functional difference between
what these two programs are doing?
No, the functional effect is exactly the same. In
int *a = &x;
int *b = &y;
swap(a, b);
// swap(&a, &b)
The type of a is the same of &a, namely int* (pointer to int). The only difference is that you're using other variables to store that, which is not really needed logically but it is absolutely fine to have it, especially if it could help you understand the syntax.
What is the difference between a dereference (*a = *b) versus using &
(*a = &x).
*a = *b assigns the value pointed to by b (obtained with *b) in the ones pointed to by a. To see it more clearly,
int tmp = *b;
*a = tmp;
&(*a = &x) is not a valid expression because you can't store an address into an int (actually you can, but that's beyond the point).