this is my code:
void foo(int num) {
int *pArr = (int *)malloc(num * sizeof(int));
// allocate array of 'sale' structs for each region
for (int i = 0; pArr != NULL && i < num; i++) {
pArr[i] = 1;
}
}
int main() {
int num = 36;
foo(num);
}
The expression pArr[i] = 1; gives a C6386 warning
Warning C6386 Buffer overrun while writing to 'pArr': the writable
size is 'num*sizeof(int)' bytes, but '8' bytes might be written.
This is very weird since the number of iterations of the for loop, AND the size of the array in the head are both dependant on num so an overrun can't actually occur ever.
And then there is a detailed explanation:
i may equal 1
pArr may be NULL (Continue this loop)
Invalid write to pArr, (outside its writable range)
But of course this is a visual studio mistake, pArr cannot be NULL, as this is a condition for entering the loop.
How can I clean this warning?
Thank you all
There is a simple change you can make to no longer get the C6386 warning. You should test the value of num before attempting the allocation. The C language standard has an interesting statement about passing a size of 0 to malloc().
7.22.3 Memory management functions
If the size of the space requested is zero, the behavior is
implementation-defined: either a null pointer is returned to indicate
an error, or the behavior is as if the size were some nonzero value,
except that the returned pointer shall not be used to access an
object.
The POSIX standard says something similar:
If size is 0, either:
A null pointer shall be returned and errno may be set to an
implementation-defined value, or
A pointer to the allocated space shall be returned. The application
shall ensure that the pointer is not used to access an object.
Microsoft's Code Analysis doesn't emit a C6386 for this code:
void foo(int num)
{
if (num == 0) { // avoid passing 0 to malloc()
return;
}
int *pArr = (int *) malloc(num * sizeof(int));
// allocate array of 'sale' structs for each region
for (int i = 0; pArr != NULL && i < num; i++) {
pArr[i] = 1;
}
}
The problem occurs because VS seems to be unable to deduce that the loop will never run if pArr is NULL. Replacing your code with
void foo(int num) {
int *pArr = (int *)malloc(num * sizeof(int));
if (pArr == NULL) {
return;
}
// allocate array of 'sale' structs for each region
for (int i = 0; i < num; i++) {
pArr[i] = 1;
}
}
int main() {
int num = 36;
foo(num);
}
will solve your problem and be more runtime-efficient.
I have two functions in my main function.
I've tried to accomplish this problem with pointers, but as a beginner, it is very complicated to work with this.
int main(){
int *p;
p = function_A();
function_B(p);
return 0;
}
int function_A(){
static int myArray[3];
myArray[0] = 11;
myArray[1] = 22;
myArray[2] = 33;
return myArray;
}
int function_B(int *myPointer){
// Here I just want to print my array I've got from function_A() to the
// console
printf("%d", *myPointer)
return 0;
}
function_A should return a array and function_B should take this array.
Thanks!
There are some issues your compiler will already have told you.
First, you should define the functions before calling them, or at least forward declare them.
Second, to return an array, you need to return a pointer to the first element of this array, i.e. return type is int * and not int.
Third, as FredK pointed out, when you receive just a pointer, you have no chance to determine how many elements are in the array it points to. You can either terminate the array with a specific value, e.g. 0, or you need to return the size of the array, too.
See the following adaptions made to your program:
int* function_A(int *size){
static int myArray[3];
myArray[0] = 11;
myArray[1] = 22;
myArray[2] = 33;
if (size) {
*size = 3;
}
return myArray;
}
void function_B(int *myPointer, int size){
for (int i=0; i<size; i++) {
printf("%d\n", myPointer[i]);
}
}
int main(){
int *p;
int size=0;
p = function_A(&size);
function_B(p,size);
return 0;
}
Note: a reference to an array degrades to the address of the first byte of the array.
the following proposed code:
cleanly compiles
incorporates the comments to the question
assumes the programmer already knows the size of the array
performs the desired functionality
appended '\n' to format string of calls to printf() so output on separate lines
and now, the proposed code:
#include <stdio.h>
int * function_A( void );
void function_B(int *myPointer);
int main( void )
{
int *p;
p = function_A();
function_B(p);
return 0;
}
int * function_A()
{
static int myArray[3];
myArray[0] = 11;
myArray[1] = 22;
myArray[2] = 33;
return myArray;
}
void function_B(int *myPointer)
{
printf("%d\n", myPointer[0]);
printf("%d\n", myPointer[1]);
printf("%d\n", myPointer[2]);
}
a run of the program produces the following output:
11
22
33
Let's say you have a function that creates an array of ints:
int *create_int_array(const size_t num)
{
int *iarray;
size_t i;
if (num < 1)
return NULL; /* Let's not return an empty array. */
iarray = malloc(num * sizeof iarray[0]);
if (!iarray)
return NULL; /* Out of memory! */
/* Fill in the array with increasing integers. */
for (i = 0; i < num; i++)
iarray[i] = i + 1;
return iarray;
}
Let's say tou have a function that calculates the sum of the integers in the array. If we ignore any overflow issues, it could look like this:
int sum_int_array(const int *iarray, const size_t num)
{
int sum = 0;
size_t i;
/* Sum of an empty array is 0. */
if (num < 1)
return 0;
for (i = 0; i < num; i++)
sum += iarray[i];
return sum;
}
Note that sizeof is not a function, but a C language keyword. Its argument is only examined for its size. Thus, sizeof iarray[0] yields the size of each element in iarray, and is completely safe and valid even if iarray is undefined or NULL at that point. You see that idiom a lot in C programs; learn to read it as "size of first element of iarray", which is the same as "size of each element in iarray", because all C array elements have the exact same size.
In your main(), you could call them thus:
#ifndef NUM
#define NUM 5
#endif
int main(void)
{
int *array, result;
array = create_int_array(NUM);
if (!array) {
fprintf(stderr, "Out of memory!\n");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
result = sum_int_array(array, NUM);
printf("Sum is %d.\n", result);
free(array);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
As you can see, there is really not much to it. Well, you do need to get familiar with the pointer syntax.
(The rule I like to point out is that when reading pointer types, read the specifiers from right to left, delimited by * read as a pointer to. Thus, int *const a reads as "a is a const, a pointer to int", and const char **b reads as "b is a pointer to a pointer to const char".)
In this kind of situations, a structure describing an array makes much more sense. For example:
typedef struct {
size_t max; /* Maximum number of elements val[] can hold */
size_t num; /* Number of elements in val[] */
int *val;
} iarray;
#define IARRAY_INIT { 0, 0, NULL }
The idea is that you can declare a variable of iarray type just as you would any other variable; but you also initialize those to an empty array using the IARRAY_INIT macro. In other words, thus:
iarray my_array = IARRAY_INIT;
With that initialization, the structure is always initialized to a known state, and we don't need a separate initialization function. We really only need a couple of helper functions:
static inline void iarray_free(iarray *array)
{
if (array) {
free(array->val);
array->max = 0;
array->num = 0;
array->val = NULL;
}
}
/* Try to grow the array dynamically.
Returns the number of elements that can be added right now. */
static inline size_t iarray_need(iarray *array, const size_t more)
{
if (!array)
return 0;
if (array->num + more > array->max) {
size_t max = array->num + more;
void *val;
/* Optional: Growth policy. Instead of allocating exactly
as much memory as needed, we allocate more,
in the hopes that this reduces the number of
realloc() calls, which tend to be a bit slow.
However, we don't want to waste too much
memory by allocating and then not using it. */
if (max < 16) {
/* Always allocate at least 16 elements, */
max = 16;
} else
if (max < 65536) {
/* up to 65535 elements add 50% extra, */
max = (3*max) / 2;
} else {
/* then round up to next multiple of 65536, less 16. */
max = (max | 65535) + 65521;
}
val = realloc(array->val, max * sizeof array->val[0]);
if (!val) {
/* We cannot grow the array. However, the old
array is still intact; realloc() does not
free it if it fails. */
return array->max - array->num;
}
/* Note: the new elements in array->val,
array->val[array->max] to
array->val[max-1], inclusive,
are undefined. That is fine, usually,
but might be important in some special
cases like resizing hash tables or such. */
array->max = max;
array->val = val;
}
return array->max - array->num;
}
/* Optional; same as initializing the variable to IARRAY_INIT. */
static inline void iarray_init(iarray *array)
{
array->max = 0;
array->num = 0;
array->val = NULL;
}
The static inline bit means that the functions are only visible in this compilation unit, and the compiler is free to implement the function directly at the call site. Basically, static inline is used for macro-like functions and accessor functions. If you put the structure in a header file (.h), you'd put the related static inline helper functions in it as well.
The growth policy part is only an example. If you omit the growth policy, and always reallocate to array->num + more elements, your code will call realloc() very often, potentially for every int appended. In most cases, doing it that often will slow down your program, because realloc() (as well as malloc(), calloc()) is kind-of slow. To avoid that, we prefer to pad or round up the allocation a bit: not too much to waste allocated but unused memory, but enough to keep the overall program fast, and not bottlenecked on too many realloc() calls.
A "good growth policy" is very much up to debate, and really depends on the task at hand. The above one should work really well on all current operating systems on desktop machines, laptops, and tablets, when the program needs only one or only a handful of such arrays.
(If a program uses many such arrays, it might implement an iarray_optimize() function, that reallocates the array to exactly the number of elements it has. Whenever an array is unlikely to change size soon, calling that function will ensure not too much memory is sitting unused but allocated in the arrays.)
Let's look at an example function that uses the above. Say, the obvious one: appending an integer to the array:
/* Append an int to the array.
Returns 0 if success, nonzero if an error occurs.
*/
int iarray_append(iarray *array, int value)
{
if (!array)
return -1; /* NULL array specified! */
if (iarray_need(array, 1) < 1)
return -2; /* Not enough memory to grow the array. */
array->val[array->num++] = value;
return 0;
}
Another example function would be one that sorts the ints in an array by ascending or descending value:
static int cmp_int_ascending(const void *ptr1, const void *ptr2)
{
const int val1 = *(const int *)ptr1;
const int val2 = *(const int *)ptr2;
return (val1 < val2) ? -1 :
(val1 > val2) ? +1 : 0;
}
static int cmp_int_descending(const void *ptr1, const void *ptr2)
{
const int val1 = *(const int *)ptr1;
const int val2 = *(const int *)ptr2;
return (val1 < val2) ? +1 :
(val1 > val2) ? -1 : 0;
}
static void iarray_sort(iarray *array, int direction)
{
if (array && array->num > 1) {
if (direction > 0)
qsort(array->val, array->num, sizeof array->val[0],
cmp_int_ascending);
else
if (direction < 0)
qsort(array->val, array->num, sizeof array->val[0],
cmp_int_descending);
}
}
Many new programmers do not realize that the standard C library has that nifty and quite efficient qsort() function for sorting arrays; all it needs is a comparison function. If the direction is positive for iarray_sort(), the array is sorted in ascending order, smallest int first; if direction is negative, then in descending order, largest int first.
A simple example main() that reads in all valid ints from standard input, sorts them, and prints them in ascending order (increasing value):
int main(void)
{
iarray array = IARRAY_INIT;
int value;
size_t i;
while (scanf(" %d", &value) == 1)
if (iarray_append(&array, value)) {
fprintf(stderr, "Out of memory.\n");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
iarray_sort(&array, +1); /* sort by increasing value */
for (i = 0; i < array.num; i++)
printf("%d\n", array.val[i]);
iarray_free(&array);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
If size of array is indeed 3 (or other small fixed value), then you can simply use structs as values, something like:
struct ints3 {
int values[3];
// if needed, can add other fields
}
int main(){
struct ints3 ints;
ints = function_A();
function_B(&ints);
return 0;
}
// note about function_A signature: void is important,
// because in C empty () means function can take any arguments...
struct ints3 function_A(void) {
// use C designated initialiser syntax to create struct value,
// and return it directly
return (struct ints3){ .values = { 11, 22, 33 } };
}
int function_B(const struct ints3 *ints) {
// pass struct as const pointer to avoid copy,
// though difference to just passing a value in this case is insignificant
// could use for loop, see other answers, but it's just 3 values, so:
printf("%d %d %d\n", ints->values[0], ints->values[1], ints->values[2]);
return 0; // does this function really need return value?
}
As you can see in the code below I tried to print an array that I created in a different function. The output was totally different numbers compares to what I expected: numbers between 0 - 20 were set but I got some negative values.
So my question is why is this happening? And how to fix it if it even possible?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <time.h>
#define LEN 10
int* creatingArray();
void printingArray(int* array);
int main(void)
{
int* pointer_array = creatingArray();
printingArray(pointer_array);
getchar();
return 0;
}
int* creatingArray()
{
srand(time(NULL));
int array[LEN] = { 0 };
int* i = 0;
for (i = array; i < array + LEN; i++)
{
*i = rand() % 20;
}
return array;
}
void printingArray(int* array)
{
int* i = 0;
for (i = array; i < array + LEN; i++)
{
printf("\n%d\n", *i);
}
}
Pay attention to this code:
int* creatingArray()
{
// stuff
int array[LEN] = { 0 };
// more stuff
return array;
}
array is a local variable, so it gets destroyed when the function returns. You then have a pointer to a destroyed variable. The space where it was will (most likely) continue to hold the data you put there - until the memory gets reused for something else and overwritten.
and how to fix it if it eve/n possible?
Several options:
Make array a static variable. Then it will not be destroyed when the function returns. (This also means that every time you call creatingArray it will use the same array, instead of a new one)
Make array global.
Move array to main, and pass a pointer to it into creatingArray, instead of having creatingArray return one. Then, since it's a local variable in main, it will only be destroyed when main returns.
Use malloc to allocate some space that will not be cleaned up automatically when the function returns.
I use nested data structure for fibonacci, but I have a segmentation fault 11.
void fib(int **fib_array, int n){
fib_array = malloc(n * sizeof(int*));
for(int i = 0; i < n; i++){
fib_array[i] = malloc(sizeof(int));
}
for(int i = 0; i < n; i++){
if (i <= 1){
fib_array[i][0] = i;
}
else{
fib_array[i][0] = fib_array[i - 2][0] + fib_array[i - 1][0];
}
}
}
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
/* do not change this main function */
int count = strtol(argv[1], NULL, 10);
int *fib_sequence;
fib(&fib_sequence, count);
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
printf("%d ", fib_sequence[i]);
}
free(fib_sequence);
return 0;
}
you are being too complicated. You just need a single malloc
*fib_array = malloc(n * sizeof(int));
and remove you second indexings [0] from everywhere
The consfusion comes from **int. This looks like a multi dim array. Its not - its declared ** so that you can set the value in the caller. A simpler exampe will help
void Make42(int* v)
{
*v = 42;
}
int main()
{
int myv = 0;
Make42(&myv);
// now myv == 42
}
The * in the arg list is so that Make42 can 'reach out' and modify what was passed to it (myv in this case)
In your code the ** on fib array is there for the same purpose. you could have done (In know you werent allowed to by the test definition )
int *fib(int n){
int *fib_array = malloc(n * sizeof(int));
......
return fib_array;
}
and in main
fib_sequence = fib(count);
this makes it much clearer that you are really manipulating a simple array
pm100 is right, but a little short for answering to a beginner...
At first, you have passed a pointer to a pointer. If you want the original pointer to contain a value, you need to dereference the pointer to pointer:
*fib_array = ...
By assigning to the pointer only (as you did in your code), you do not modify the orignial pointer (fib_sequence in main) at all. And as you have not initialised it, it might point to anywhere, thus the segmentation fault when you try to print the values of it.
Then why an array of pointers to individually stored values? You can use a contiguous array of ints, which you get by
*fib_array = malloc(n * sizeof(int));
OK, further usage won't be too nice ((*fib_array)[i] = ...), so I recommend a temporary variable instead:
int* fa = malloc(n * sizeof(int));
// now fill in the values comfortably:
fa[i] = ...;
// finally, assign the pointer to the target:
*fib_array = fa;
Side note: always check the result of malloc, it could be NULL:
fa = ...
if(fa)
// assign values
else
// appropriate error handling
In your concrete case, you could omit the else branch in your function and check your pointer outside within main function.
By the way, a simple return value would have made your live easier, too:
int* fib(int n)
{
int* fib_array = malloc(n * sizeof(int*));
// ...
return fib_array;
}
Notice: no need for pointer to pointer... Usage:
int* fib_sequence = fib(count);
I tried different methods but eventually got errors. Please give a solution and a brief explanation of the concept.
uint8_t **subBytes()
{
int i,j;
uint8_t r,c;
uint8_t t[4][4];
for(i=0;i<4;i++)
{
for (j=0;j<4;j++)
{
r = pt[p1][j] & 0xf0;
r = r >> 4;
c = pt[p1][j] & 0x0f;
t[i][j] = (uint8_t *) malloc(sizeof(uint8_t));
t[i][j] = sBox[r][c];
}
p1++;
}
return t;
}
int main()
{
uint8_t **temp;
temp = subBytes();
for(i=0;i<4;i++)
{
for(j=0;j<4;j++)
{
printf("%x ", temp[i][j]);
}
printf("\n");
}
}
This is my original code. Here, I used malloc, but then too it is not working.
the memory space alloced for your matrix is a LOCAL VARIABLE.
The scope of a LOCAL VARIABLE is only within that function.
When you returned it is discarded.
In your code it is uint8_t t[4][4].
t is discarded right after return t.
So you return nothing and may cause undefined behavior.
You should use malloc to alloc memory for your matrix not just declare it locally.
in code
uint8_t **t.
t = malloc(sizeof(uint8_t) * 16 ) //size of a 4x4 matrix
then use t as a two dimension array and return t.like
t[0][0] = 1;
don't forgot to free it after use it out side of the function.
free(t);
m is LOCAL VARIABLES. When add returns, m is DESTROYED!
You SHOULD NOT return the pointer or reference of local variables. Look the following code:
int foo() { return 1; }
int *bar() { int i = 1; return &i; }
When I call foo(), it returns 1.
When I call bar(), it try to return the local variables, i's address. But when bar() returns, the i variable is DESTROYED! So the return pointer become trash pointer. (Sorry, I don't know how to say that term in English;)
You should use like that:
void bar(int *ret) { *ret = 1; }
int i;
bar(&i); /* now i is 1 */
or
int *bar()
{
int *p = (int *)malloc(sizeof(int));
*p = 1;
return p;
}
int *pi = bar();
/* now *pi is 1 */
...
free(pi); /* You MUST free pi. If not, memory lack is coming~ */
(I recommend first one. the second one require free and it can be mistaken.)
When a variable is declared (statically allocated) within a function, it is placed on what is called the stack, which is only local to that function. When the program leaves that function's scope, the variable is no longer guaranteed to be preserved, and so the pointer you return to it is essentially useless.
You have three options to fix your error:
Don't do it
Simply declare the array in the same function as you use it, don't bother with trying to return a pointer from another function.
Pass a pointer to a variable local to main
A pointer to a variable local to main will be valid until main returns, so you could do this:
void subBytes(uint8_t t[4][4]){
//perform initialization of matrix on passed variable
}
int main(){
uint8_t temp[4][4];
subBytes(&temp);
//...
}
Dynamic Allocation
This will probably give you more errors than it will solve in this case, but if you are heartset on returning a pointer to a matrix, you could malloc() the memory for the array and then return it, but you would have to free() it afterwards.
In C, there are several ways to dynamically allocate a 2D array. The first is to create it as a single array, and operate on the indices to treat it as 2D.
//...
int *arr = (int *)malloc(rows*cols*sizeof(int));
for (int i = 0; i<rows; i++){
for (int j = 0; j<height; j++){
arr[i*height + j] = i*j; //whatever
}
}
return arr; // type is int *
//...
Note that in this method, you cannot use array[i][j] syntax, because the compiler doesn't know the width and height.
The second way is to treat it as an array of arrays, so store an array of pointers to other arrays.
//...
int **arr = (int **)malloc(rows*sizeof(int *));
for (int i = 0; i<rows; i++){
arr[i] = (int *)malloc(cols*sizeof(int));
}
arr[i][j] = 86; //whatever
return arr; //type is int **
//...
For further information, see: Pointer to Local Variable