Load Structs in C - c

In my header file I have defined some structs:
typedef struct { double X; } feature_t;
typedef struct
{
int n;
feature_t *Features;
float *Weights;
} signature_t;
In my main code I declare some new structs and try to load them:
feature_t *f_x;
int i;
memset(f_x,0,sizeof(feature_t)*n_x);
for(i=0; i<n_x; i++){
f_x[i] = 100.0;
w_x[i] = (float)p_x[i];
}
When I go to compile this, I get the following error:
error: incompatible types when assigning to type ‘feature_t {aka struct <anonymous>}’ from type ‘double’
Why does the compiler having trouble loading this double into this field? I declared it as a double.
thanks!

There is a compile problem and a run-time problem that needs to be fixed once the compile problem is out of the way.
The compile problem is that you cannot cast a float to a struct, even when the struct's only field is a float. You need to assign it like this:
f_x[i].X = ... // some float expression here
The run-time problem is that feature_t *f_x; pointer cannot be used like an array until you assign it some memory. Recall that pointers are not arrays. You need to do something like this:
feature_t *f_x = malloc(sizeof(*f_x)*n_x);

You have two options:
The first: make your feature_t instance an "automatic" variable on the stack - so no extra work needs to be done, but you can't use the object from the caller of the function that creates it:
void doSomething(size_t n) {
struct feature_t f_x[n];
for(size_t i = 0; i < n; i++) {
f_x[i] = {};
f_x[i].X = 100.0;
}
}
(Note the above example uses a VLA, this is not permitted in C++, only C99)
Because f_X lives in the stack, the = {} initialization syntax means the raw object data in the stack is zeroed out.
(Note that you cannot use the ={} syntax to initialize a VLA, each element must be initialized individually)
The second is to use the heap, but you must ensure you deallocate the memory eventually otherwise it will be a memory leak:
void doSomething(size_t n) {
struct feature_t* f_x = calloc( n, sizeof(struct feature_t) );
if( f_x == NULL ) exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
for(size_t i = 0; i < n; i++) {
f_x[i].X = 100.0;
}
free( f_x );
}
In this case, f_x is actually a pointer to the array of feature_t instances that lives on the heap, so its lifespan is potentially beyond the doSomething function scope - however I called free before the function returned.
I used calloc which allocates and zeroes-out memory before returning control to the caller, whereas malloc only allocates memory and exposes what memory contents were there previously, which is generally undesirable unless you absolutely need the performance gains by not explicitly zeroing memory.

Related

Warning: Return from incompatible pointer type

The code below is producing a compiler warning: return from incompatible pointer type. The type I'm returning seems to be the issue but I cant seem to fix this warning.
I have tried changing the type of hands to int *. Also have tried returning &hands.
int * dealDeck(int numPlayers, int numCards, int cardDeck[])
{
static int hands[MAX_PLAYERS][MAX_CARDS]={0};
int start = 0;
int end = numCards;
int player, hand, j;
int card;
for(player = 0; player < numPlayers; player++)
{
for(hand = start, j=0; hand < end; hand++,j++)
{
card = cardDeck[hand];
hands[player][j] = card;
}
start = end;
end += numCards;
}
return hands;
}
This function should return a pointer to the array "hands". This array is then passed to another function which will print out its elements.
The hands variable is not an int * this is a int **
So you need to return a int **
This is a 2d array.
First of all, you have declared return type of int *, which would mean, that you are trying to return an array, while you want to return a 2-dimensional array. The proper type for this would usually be int **, but that won't cut it here. You opted to go with static, fixed size array. That means, that you need to return pointer to some structures of size MAX_CARDS * sizeof(int) (and proper type, which is the real problem here). AFAIK, there is no way to specify that return type in C*.
There are many alternatives though. You could keep the static approach, if you specify only up to 1 size (static int *hands[MAX_PLAYERS] or static int **hands), but then you need to dynamically allocate the inner arrays.
The sane way to do it is usually "call by reference", where you define the array normally before calling the function and you pass it as a parameter to the function. The function then directly modifies the outside variables. While it will help massively, with the maintainability of your code, I was surprised to find out, that it doesn't get rid of the warning. That means, that the best solution is probably to dynamically allocate the array, before calling the function and then pass it as an argument to the function, so it can access it. This also solves the question of whether the array needs to be initialized, and whether = {0} is well readable way to do it (for multidimensional array) , since you'll have to initialize it "manually".
Example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#define PLAYERS 10
#define DECKS 20
void foo(int **bar)
{
bar[0][0] = 777;
printf("%d", bar[0][0]);
/*
* no point in returning the array you were already given
* but for the purposes of curiosity you could change the type from
* void to int ** and "return bar;"
*/
}
int main()
{
int **arr;
arr = malloc(sizeof(int *) * PLAYERS);
for (size_t d = 0; d < DECKS; d++) {
/* calloc() here if you need the zero initialization */
arr[d] = malloc(sizeof(int) * DECKS);
}
foo(arr);
return 0;
}
*some compilers call such type like int (*)[20], but that isn't valid C syntax

How to return multiple types from a function in C?

I have a function in C which calculates the mean of an array. Within the same loop, I am creating an array of t values. My current function returns the mean value. How can I modify this to return the t array also?
/* function returning the mean of an array */
double getMean(int arr[], int size) {
int i;
printf("\n");
float mean;
double sum = 0;
float t[size];/* this is static allocation */
for (i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
sum += arr[i];
t[i] = 10.5*(i) / (128.0 - 1.0);
//printf("%f\n",t[i]);
}
mean = sum/size;
return mean;
}
Thoughts:
Do I need to define a struct within the function? Does this work for type scalar and type array? Is there a cleaner way of doing this?
You can return only 1 object in a C function. So, if you can't choose, you'll have to make a structure to return your 2 values, something like :
typedef struct X{
double mean;
double *newArray;
} X;
BUT, in your case, you'll also need to dynamically allocate the t by using malloc otherwise, the returned array will be lost in stack.
Another way, would be to let the caller allocate the new array, and pass it to you as a pointer, this way, you will still return only the mean, and fill the given array with your computed values.
The most common approach for something like this is letting the caller provide storage for the values you want to return. You could just make t another parameter to your function for that:
double getMean(double *t, const int *arr, size_t size) {
double sum = 0;
for (size_t i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
sum += arr[i];
t[i] = 10.5*(i) / (128.0 - 1.0);
}
return sum/size;
}
This snippet also improves on some other aspects:
Don't use float, especially not when you intend to return a double. float has very poor precision
Use size_t for object sizes. While int often works, size_t is guaranteed to hold any possible object size and is the safe choice
Don't mix output in functions calculating something (just a stylistic advice)
Declare variables close to where they are used first (another stylistic advice)
This is somewhat opinionated, but I changed your signature to make it explicit the function is passed pointers to arrays, not arrays. It's impossible to pass an array in C, therefore a parameter with an array type is automatically adjusted to the corresponding pointer type anyways.
As you don't intend to modify what arr points to, make it explicit by adding a const. This helps for example the compiler to catch errors if you accidentally attempt to modify this array.
You would call this code e.g. like this:
int numbers[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
double foo[5];
double mean = getMean(foo, numbers, 5);
instead of the magic number 5, you could write e.g. sizeof numbers / sizeof *numbers.
Another approach is to dynamically allocate the array with malloc() inside your function, but this requires the caller to free() it later. Which approach is more suitable depends on the rest of your program.
Following the advice suggested by #FelixPalmen is probably the best choice. But, if there is a maximum array size that can be expected, it is also possible to wrap arrays in a struct, without needing dynamic allocation. This allows code to create new structs without the need for deallocation.
A mean_array structure can be created in the get_mean() function, assigned the correct values, and returned to the calling function. The calling function only needs to provide a mean_array structure to receive the returned value.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <assert.h>
#define MAX_ARR 100
struct mean_array {
double mean;
double array[MAX_ARR];
size_t num_elems;
};
struct mean_array get_mean(int arr[], size_t arr_sz);
int main(void)
{
int my_arr[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
struct mean_array result = get_mean(my_arr, sizeof my_arr / sizeof *my_arr);
printf("mean: %f\n", result.mean);
for (size_t i = 0; i < result.num_elems; i++) {
printf("%8.5f", result.array[i]);
}
putchar('\n');
return 0;
}
struct mean_array get_mean(int arr[], size_t arr_sz)
{
assert(arr_sz <= MAX_ARR);
struct mean_array res = { .num_elems = arr_sz };
double sum = 0;
for (size_t i = 0; i < arr_sz; i++) {
sum += arr[i];
res.array[i] = 10.5 * i / (128.0 - 1.0);
}
res.mean = sum / arr_sz;
return res;
}
Program output:
mean: 3.000000
0.00000 0.08268 0.16535 0.24803 0.33071
In answer to a couple of questions asked by OP in the comments:
size_t is the correct type to use for array indices, since it is guaranteed to be able to hold any array index. You can often get away with int instead; be careful with this, though, since accessing, or even forming a pointer to, the location one before the first element of an array leads to undefined behavior. In general, array indices should be non-negative. Further, size_t may be a wider type than int in some implementations; size_t is guaranteed to hold any array index, but there is no such guarantee for int.
Concerning the for loop syntax used here, e.g., for (size_t i = 0; i < sz; i++) {}: here i is declared with loop scope. That is, the lifetime of i ends when the loop body is exited. This has been possible since C99. It is good practice to limit variable scopes when possible. I default to this so that I must actively choose to make loop variables available outside of loop bodies.
If the loop-scoped variables or size_t types are causing compilation errors, I suspect that you may be compiling in C89 mode. Both of these features were introduced in C99.If you are using gcc, older versions (for example, gcc 4.x, I believe) default to C89. You can compile with gcc -std=c99 or gcc -std=c11 to use a more recent language standard. I would recommend at least enabling warnings with: gcc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra to catch many problems at compilation time. If you are working in Windows, you may also have similar difficulties. As I understand it, MSVC is C89 compliant, but has limited support for later C language standards.

Initializing structure with variable length array in C

Does anyone know if there is a way to initialize a structure containing a variable length array without initializing the array first in a separate variable (and without using malloc)?
My structure looks like this:
struct my_struct {
int *values;
int size;
}
For now in my code I have that:
void my_function (int size) {
int values[size];
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = values,
.size = size
};
...
}
(Array is initialized first, then the structure. This is working but it looks awkward to declare a separate variable for the array.)
This would probably work as well:
void my_function (int size) {
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = calloc (size, sizeof (int)),
.size = size
};
...
}
(but I do not want to use mallocs)
But what I would like to write is something like:
void my_function (int size) {
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = (int[size]){},
.size = size
};
...
}
Any idea?
First of all, note that you cannot use an array from your stack if you want to return your structure.
int values[size];
struct my_struct mystr = {
.values = values,
.size = size
};
return mystr;
This is not going to work since the lifetime of values ends when you return. The same applies if you try to store mystr in a value pointed by a parameter of your function.
Obviously you're not doing that, however I think it's worth to mention anyway.
Answer to your question: it depends on the situation.
Can you be sure that size is small? Or else your stack is going to overflow in int values[size]. Is it small and predictable? Stick with your first solution. If it can be large or dependent on user-input, definitely use malloc.
Are you in some way returning or retaining a persistent pointer to your structure or values? Use malloc (see my first remark).
Alternatively, you can also use the struct hack but then you would have to malloc the entire mystr anyway.
One more thing, you wrote:
(Array is initialized first, then the structure. This is working but
it looks awkward to declare a separate variable for the array.)
I'm not sure what you mean, but the int * is only sizeof(intptr_t), irregardless of the size of the array. So you're not allocating twice the memory for 1 array, if that's what you're thinking.
Initializer are unnamed objects initialized by the initializer list. Outside the body of a function, the object has static storage duration. So it is possible to use the address of such an object. With a little help from variadic macros you can try →
#include <stdio.h>
struct test {
int count;
int *values;
} test[] = {
#define init(...) { .count=sizeof( (int[]) {__VA_ARGS__} )/sizeof(int), .values=(int *)&(int []){__VA_ARGS__} }
init(0,1,2,3,4),
init(2,4,6,8),
init(1,3),
init(42)
};
#define test_size ((int) (sizeof test/sizeof *test))
int main(void)
{
for(int array=0; array<test_size; ++array) {
printf("array %d (%d) : [ ", array+1, test[array].count);
for(int i=0; i<test[array].count; ++i)
printf("%d ", test[array].values[i]);
puts("]");
}
return 0;
}

Passing pointers to arrays to functions

I am storing my information in an array of pointers to structs. In other words, each element of the array is a pointer to a linked list.
I don't know how long the array should be, so instead of initializing the array in my main() function, I instead intialize the double pointer
struct graph** graph_array;
Then once I obtain the length of the array, I try to initialize each element of graph_array using a function GraphInitialize:
int GraphInitialize(struct graph* *graph_array,int vertices)
{
struct graph* graph_array2[vertices+1];
graph_array = graph_array2;
int i;
for (i=0;i<vertices+1;i++)
{
graph_array[i] = NULL;
}
return 0;
}
But for some reason this is not returning the updated graph_array to main(). Basically, this function is updating graph_array locally, and no change is being made. As a result, any time I try to access an element of graph_array it seg faults because it is not initialized. What am I doing wrong?
Edit: Following the convo with Tom Ahh I should add something else that makes this more confusing.
I don't call GraphIntialize directly from main(). Instead, I call getdata() from main, and pass a pointer to graph_array to getdata as shown below.
getdata(argc, argv, vertpt, edgept, &graph_array)
int getdata(int argc, char *argv[], int *verts, int *edges, struct graph* **graph_array)
Then getdata gets the number of vertices from my input file, and uses that to call GraphInitialize:
if ((GraphInitialize(&graph_array, *verts)) == -1)
{
printf("GraphCreate failed");
return 0;
}
This results in an error: "expected 'struct graph 3ASTERISKS' but argument is of type 'struct graph 4ASTERISKS'.
When you assign something to graph_array, you simply assign it to its local copy. The changes made to it in the function will not be see-able by the caller. You need to pass it by pointer value to be able to change its value. Change your function prototype to int GraphInitialize(struct graph ***graph_array,int vertices) and when you call it, use GraphInitialize(&graph_array, 42).
Second problem in your code is when you create graph_array2, you declare it to be local to your GraphInitialize() function. Thus, when exiting your function, graph_array2 is destroyed, even if you assigned it to *graph_array. (the star dereferences the pointer to assign it to the value it points to).
change your assignation to *graph_array = malloc(sizeof(*graph_array) * vertices); and you should be fine.
Memory is divided into two parts, the stack and the heap. Malloc will give you back a chunk of memory from the heap, which lives on between functions, but must be freed. Thus your program must be careful to keep track of the malloced() memory and call free() on it.
Declaring a variable graph_array2[vertices+1] allocates a local variable on the stack. When the function returns the stack pointer is popped "freeing" the memory allocated in the function call. You don't have to manage the memory manually, but when the function call is over it no longer exists.
See here for some discussion of the two allocation styles:
http://www.ucosoft.com/stack-vs-heap.html
You're using C99-style local array allocation. The array disappears when the function returns. Instead you need to use malloc() to allocate memory that will persist after the function. You can use typedefs to make your code more readable:
typedef struct graph_node_s { // linked list nodes
struct graph_node_s *next;
...
} GRAPH_NODE;
typedef GRAPH_NODE *NODE_REF; // reference to node
typedef NODE_REF *GRAPH; // var length array of reference to node
GRAPH AllocateGraph(int n_vertices)
{
int i;
GRAPH g;
g = malloc(n_vertices * sizeof(NODE_REF));
if (!g)
return NULL;
for (i = 0; i < n_vertices; i++)
g[i] = NULL;
return g;
}
You have two problems.
First, graph_array2 has auto extent, meaning that it only exists within its enclosing scope, which is the body of the GraphInitialize function; once the function exits, that memory is released, and graph_array is no longer pointing anywhere meaningful.
Second, any changes to the parameter graph_array are local to the function; the changes won't be reflected in the caller. Remember, all parameters are passed by value; if you pass a pointer to a function, and you want the value of the pointer to be modified by the function, you must pass a pointer to the pointer, like so:
void foo(int **p)
{
*p = some_new_pointer_value();
return;
}
int main(void)
{
int *ptr = NULL;
foo(&ptr);
...
}
If you intend for InitializeGraph to allocate the memory for your array, you'll need to do something like this:
int InitializeGraph(struct graph ***graph_array, int vertices)
{
*graph_array = malloc(sizeof **graph_array * vertices);
if (*graph_array)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < vertices; i++)
{
(*graph_array}[i] = NULL; // parentheses matter here!
}
}
else
{
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
int main(void)
{
int v;
struct graph **arr;
...
if (GraphInitialize(&arr, v) == 0)
{
// array has been allocated and initialized.
}
...
}
Postfix operators like [] have higher precedence than unary operators like *, so the expression *arr[i] is interpreted as *(arr[i]); we're dereferencing the i'th element of the array. In GraphInitialize, we need to dereference graph_array before subscripting (graph_array isn't an array, it points to an array), so we need to write (*graph_array)[i].

How to declare and initialize this array of structs in C when the length is not known till runtime?

foo.c
#include "main.h"
unsigned char currentBar;
struct foo myFoo[getNumBars()];
void initMyFoo(void)
{
currentBar=(getNumBars()-1);
for(i=0; i<(sizeof(myFoo)/sizeof(myFoo[0])); i++)
{
myFoo[i].we = 1;
myFoo[i].want = 0;
myFoo[i].your = 0;
myFoo[i].soul = 0;
}
}
main.c
#include "foo.h"
unsigned char getNumBars()
{
return getDipSwitchValues();
}
initMyFoo();
(struct foo is declared in foo.h.)
This code has to execute without hard coding a number for Bars, as the number of Bars will change according to whatever the user sets his DIP switches. Right now I'm not able to initialize myFoo; I get the error "constant expression expected in initializer." Do I have to initialize it like:
struct foo myFoo[];
and change it later? If so, how do I make myFoo[] the correct length? I obviously don't have a constant available that corresponds to the desired size. Do I need to dynamically allocate this or something?
I found this similar answer but it wasn't too helpful for me - C++ a class with an array of structs, without knowing how large an array I need
struct foo* myFoo;
unsigned int myFooSize;
void initMyFoo(void)
{
myFooSize = getNumBars();
myFoo = malloc(myFooSize * sizeof(*myFoo));
for (i=0; i<myFooSize; i++) {
/* ... */
}
}
void cleanupMyFoo(void)
{
free(myFoo);
myFoo = NULL;
myFooSize = 0;
}
1 - in C99 you can use variable length arrays, which allow you to create arrays whose lengths are runtime-determined. You can also use them via compiler extensions (GCC supports them for non-C99 C and C++), but that's not a portable solution.
int someUnknownSize = 0;
/* some code that changes someUnknownSize */
struct foo myFoo[someUnknownSize];
2 - Declare a pointer that will be allocated memory at runtime with malloc or calloc.
struct foo *fooPtr = 0; /* null pointer to struct foo */
int sizeToAlloc = 0;
/* determine how much to allocate/modify sizeToAlloc */
fooPtr = malloc(sizeToAlloc * sizeof(*fooPtr));
/* do stuff with the pointer - you can treat it like you would an array using [] notation */
free(fooPtr);
I usually go for an expected maximum array size and if it's needed, just resize it:
type * a = calloc(sizeof(type),exp_array_size);
and upon pushing a new value onto the array (yeak, OK, I treat it as if it was a stack...), I check its current size against the new one:
if (current_size > max_size) {
max_size *= 2;
realloc(a,max_size*sizeof(type));
}

Resources