To make my code as clear as possible, I am trying to do something like :
struct Test {
int a;
int b;
struct Test2 c;
};
struct Test2{
int d;
};
Of course this code is wrong because struct Test2 is used before being defined. I want to declare the struct forward. So I typed struct Test2; before struct Test but it didn't work. Is there a solution?
I know it is possible with functions, so maybe it should be the case for structures?
The reason that this is not possible is that when you place a concrete struct Test2 object inside struct Test, you need to know the size of Test2 to determine the size of Test. But you can't know the size without knowing the full definition first.
Forward declarations allow you to use a pointer to a type, since you can point to something without knowing the details until later. While it may not completely satisfy your needs, you could do something like the following with a forward declaration:
struct Test {
int a;
int b;
struct Test2 *c;
};
The reason that a function declaration works is that it tells you everything you need to know about how to interface with the function. You don't need the function itself for that.
It only works if struct Test holds a pointer of type struct Test2*.
If it holds an instance, struct Test2 must be defined before struct Test because the size of struct Test2 must be known.
Related
Hi I was triying to make something like this, but I cant sort it out. The problem is one typedef needs the other one. I would really appreciate someones help!
#ifndef SHELL_DATA_H
#define SHELL_DATA_H
#include <buffer.h>
#define COMMANDS 10
#define MAX_ARGS 4
typedef struct {
void (*command)(int, char **, t_shellData *shelldData);
char *name;
char *description;
} t_command;
typedef struct {
t_command commands[COMMANDS];
t_buffer buffer;
char username[BUFFER_SIZE];
} t_shellData;
#endif
typedef struct command t_command;
typedef struct shelldata t_shellData;
struct command {
void (*command)(int, char **, t_shellData *shelldData);
char *name;
char *description;
};
struct shelldata {
t_command commands[COMMANDS];
t_buffer buffer;
char username[BUFFER_SIZE];
};
should fix it up for you. The structure tag and typedef name can be the same; I just renamed them for clarity.
C is a simple language, with an underlying principle of do not surprise people. For this reason, entities in C need to be declared or defined before they are used. As a simple example:
int f() {
int a = 7;
int b = a;
....
}
is OK, but this is not:
int f() {
int b = a;
int a = 7;
....
}
and while not exactly, languages like golang permit this -- the compiler will root around and find the definition you obviously wanted.
Typedef, in C, really just puts an entry into the symbol table; it is like a define, but less blunt, so the line:
typedef struct a A;
Serves to inform the compiler of two things: somewhere there is a structure with tag a, and I want A to be a shortform for it. There is another form of this:
struct a;
typedef struct a A;
Here, the first line tells the compiler "I want you to know about a thing called struct a"; and the second line "I want an alias to that struct a thing called A".
So, as the compiler progresses through the source, it knows that an A means a struct a, and even if it hasn't seen the definition of struct a, it has a placeholder.
But, if you attempted, before defining struct a to define another structure:
struct b {
struct a stuff;
int morestuff;
};
The compiler would complain, because it doesn't know the layout of a struct a; however this:
struct b {
struct a *stuff;
int morestuff;
};
is OK, because it knows how big a pointer is, and can defer its understanding of a struct a until it needs it.
So, Summary: declare or define data types before you attempt to use them. The C compiler requires it. A declaration is ok, unless you need the actual layout of it, in which case a definition is required.
Good Luck.
How can I use struct A to modify the data inside a struct B. Which has no name, just a type.
struct A {
struct B;
};
struct B {
int data;
};
Since this is for school, I can't change the code above. I can only use it. I tried something like this for my main but it doesn't work
int main (){
struct A myStruct;
myStruct.B.data = 3;
return 0;
}
Thanks in advance.
Edit: Sorry I was just trying to post this as fast as possible that's why I didn't post this with proper c syntax. Anyway, it's my fault for not being clear enough on my question.
I'm aware that my main doesn't work I just want to know if it's ever possible to access the data inside struct B without declaring a name for it inside struct A as I have above. This is the code I was given by a teacher, so I didn't want to modify the structs because I thought maybe she wants us to brainstorm a way to use it the way she wrote it.
The way iharob explains it works perfectly by declaring struct B before struct A, and actually giving a name to struct B.
Is it simply not possible to access that data inside struct B without giving it a name?
The code you posted is not even c code, it would not compile.
Your main mistake is that you don't need to use the struct name to access the member. This should be good
struct B
{
int data;
};
struct A
{
struct B member;
};
int main(void)
{
struct A instance;
instance.member.data = 3;
return 0;
}
I assume that you posted some sample code, don't do that. Post the actual code that has issues. The code you posted is completely invalid because some one of the definitions lack the type, you can't declare structs without using struct in c except if you typedef it. So please post the actual code the next time.
And don't build such complicated structs with struct members unless you really know what you are doing.
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.
Sometimes I see code like this (I hope I remember it correctly):
typedef struct st {
int a; char b;
} *stp;
While the usual pattern that I familiar with, is:
typedef struct st {
int a; char b;
} st;
So what's the advantage in the first code example?
You probably mean this:
typedef struct ST {
/* fields omitted */
} *STP;
The asterisk is at the end of the statement. This simply means "define the type STP to be a pointer to a struct of this type". The struct tag (ST) is not needed, it's only useful if you want to be able to refer to the struct type by itself, later on.
You could also have both, like so:
typedef struct {
/* fields omitted */
} ST, *STP;
This would make it possible to use ST to refer to the struct type itself, and STP for pointers to ST.
Personally I find it a very bad practice to include the asterisk in typedefs, since it tries to encode something (the fact that the type is a pointer) into the name of the type, when C already provides its own mechanism (the asterisk) to show this. It makes it very confusing and breaks the symmetry of the asterisk, which appears both in declaration and use of pointers.
It's a habit that stems from the time when typedef names and struct tagnames were in the same namespace. See http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2008/03/26/8336829.aspx
I think you are talking about :
typedef struct{
int a;
char b;
} object, *objectPointer;
This means that (new) type objectPointer is a pointer to struct (object) defined above. Its easy to declare pointers to object struct this way. For instance,
objectPointer A = (objectPointer)malloc(sizeof(object));
A->a = 2;
Now, A is a pointer to struct object and you can access its variables as described above.
In case, objectPointer was not defined,
struct object *A = (struct object *)malloc(sizeof(object));
A->a = 2;
So, I guess objectPointer is more intuitive and easy to use.
I hope that the first code would say a compiler error ,
I see no good reason for the typedef name be different from the tag name.
Now, the reason for which the tag name needs to be typedefed if you don't want to use
struct tag v;
but
tag v;
is probably an historical one. For as long as I remember, C had typedef but I don't know if it was true when struct have been introduced (handling of typedef is a nuisance in the C grammar). In the old code I've seen, using typedef for struct isn't done, and there are things like unix
struct stat;
int stat(const char*, struct stat*);
which would break with an automatic typedef. One those are introduced, changing is quite difficult (yes, C++ has automatic typedef but C++ has special wording to handle that case of overloading and it would be yet another complication).
What is forward reference in C with respect to pointers?
Can I get an example?
See this page on forward references. I don't see how forward referencing would be different with pointers and with other PoD types.
Note that you can forward declare types, and declare variables which are pointers to that type:
struct MyStruct;
struct MyStruct *ptr;
struct MyStruct var; // ILLEGAL
ptr->member; // ILLEGAL
struct MyStruct {
// ...
};
// Or:
typedef struct MyStruct MyStruct;
MyStruct *ptr;
MyStruct var; // ILLEGAL
ptr->member; // ILLEGAL
struct MyStruct {
// ...
};
I think this is what you're asking for when dealing with pointers and forward declaration.
I think "forward reference" with respect to pointers means something like this:
struct MyStruct *ptr; // this is a forward reference.
struct MyStruct
{
struct MyStruct *next; // another forward reference - this is much more useful
// some data members
};
The pointer is declared before the structure it points to is defined.
The compiler can get away with this because the pointer stores an address, and you don't need to know what is at that address to reserve the memory for the pointer.
Forward reference is when you declare a type but do not define it.
It allows you to use the type by pointer (or reference for C++) but you cannot declare a variable.
This is a way to say to the compiler that something exists
Say that you have a Plop structure defined in Plop.h:
struct Plop
{
int n;
float f;
};
Now you want to add some utility functions that works with that struct. You create another file PlopUtils.h (let's say you can't change Plop.h):
struct Plop; // Instead of including Plop.h, just use a forward declaration to speed up compile time
void doSomething(Plop* plop);
void doNothing(Plop* plop);
Now when you implement those function, you will need the structure definition, so you need to include the Plop.h file in your PlopUtils.cpp:
#include "PlopUtils.h"
#include "Plop.h" // now we need to include the header in order to work with the type
void doSomething(Plop* plop)
{
plop->n ...
}
void doNothing(Plop* plop);
{
plop->f ...
}
I think the C compiler originally had a pass in which it did symbol table building and semantic analysis together. So for example:
....
... foo(a,b) + 1 ... // assumes foo returns int
....
double foo(double x, double y){ ... } // violates earlier assumption
to prevent this, you say:
double foo(double x, double y); // this is the forward declaration
....
... foo(a,b) + 1 ... // correct assumptions made
....
double foo(double x, double y){ ... } // this is the real declaration
Pascal had the same concept.
Adding to previous answers. The typical situation in which forward reference is mandatory is when a struct foo contains a pointer to a struct bar, and bar contains a pointer to foo (a circular dependency between declarations). The only way to express this situation in C is to use a forward declaration, i.e.:
struct foo;
struct bar
{
struct foo *f;
};
struct foo
{
struct bar *b;
};
Forward references allow C compiler to do less passes and significantly reduces compilation time. It is probably was important some 20 years ago when computers was much slower and compliers less efficient.