That's my homework, making a sudoku game. I have done my algorithm but it's entering infinite loop. I didn't understand why.
I am trying create a random number and control it for find true number. Checking all columns and rows for find same number as like as our random number if it is, it's changing test number and if test has changed trying find another number for true number. Simple sudoku logic.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main() {
srand(time(NULL));
int num, col, row, row2, col2, test = 0;
int sudo[9][9] = {{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0}};
for (row = 0; row <= 8; row++) {
for (col = 0; col <= 8; col++) {
do {
test = 0;
num = rand() % 9 + 1;
//control
for (col2 = 0; col2 <= 8; col2++) {
if (num == sudo[col2][row]) {
test++;
}
}
for (row2 = 0; row2 <= 8; row2++) {
if (num == sudo[col][row2]) {
test++;
}
}
} while (test > 0);
sudo[col][row] = num;
}
}
//print
for (row = 0; row <= 8; row++) {
for (col = 0; col <= 8; col++) {
printf(" %d ", sudo[col][row]);
if (col == 2 || col == 5) {
printf(" | ");
}
}
if (row == 2 || row == 5) {
printf("\n---------------------------------");
}
printf("\n");
}
}
Your algorithm is broken, and I can demonstrate why. If it were possible to fill in a sudoku puzzle this way, it would also be trivial to solve a sudoku puzzle this way, which it is not.
Essentially your code boils down to the following. I've added early exits on the inner for-loops to stop searching once we find the number already in the current row or column (and actually made sense of what 99.9% of the world thinks of concerning "rows" and "columns" in a NxN matrix):
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
#define NSIZE 9
void print_matrix(int const ar[][NSIZE])
{
for (size_t i=0; i<NSIZE; ++i)
{
for (size_t j=0; j<NSIZE; ++j)
{
fputc('0' + ar[i][j], stdout);
fputc(' ', stdout);
}
fputc('\n', stdout);
}
}
int main()
{
srand((unsigned)time(NULL));
int sudo[NSIZE][NSIZE] = {{0}};
int row, col;
for(row=0;row<NSIZE;++row)
{
for(col=0;col<NSIZE;++col)
{
int row2 = 0, col2 = 0, num;
printf("Trying ");
do
{
num = rand()%9+1;
printf("%d ", num);
for(row2=0; row2<NSIZE && num!=sudo[row2][col]; ++row2);
for(col2=0; col2<NSIZE && num!=sudo[row][col2]; ++col2);
}
while (row2 < NSIZE || col2 < NSIZE);
fputc('\n', stdout);
sudo[row][col] = num;
printf("sudo[%d][%d] = %d\n", row, col, num);
print_matrix(sudo);
}
}
}
As the loops progress, we report what number we're trying, and what the matrix looks like upon placement of a keeper. For example, a test run of the above initially can look like this:
Trying 8
sudo[0][0] = 8
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trying 1
sudo[0][1] = 1
8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trying 9
sudo[0][2] = 9
8 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trying 6
sudo[0][3] = 6
8 1 9 6 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trying 3
sudo[0][4] = 3
8 1 9 6 3 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trying 4
sudo[0][5] = 4
8 1 9 6 3 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trying 4 6 7
sudo[0][6] = 7
8 1 9 6 3 4 7 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Trying 1 3 1 3 4 1 3 8 4 9 3 8 1 4 7 9 3 8 8 8 4 9 6 5
sudo[0][7] = 5
8 1 9 6 3 4 7 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
and this continues for perhaps a while. But eventually, unless you get extraordinarily lucky, the following is bound to happen (and this one went pretty deep before the wheels fell off):
Trying 1 6 3 4
sudo[6][6] = 4
8 1 9 6 3 4 7 5 2
1 3 5 4 8 6 2 7 9
3 6 4 8 7 9 5 2 1
7 9 1 2 4 5 3 8 6
4 7 3 9 2 8 6 1 5
5 4 2 3 6 1 8 9 7
6 8 7 1 9 3 4 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Note we're about to try and populate sudo[6][7]. To do that we must find a number that is not in the sudo[r][7] column already, nor the sudo[6][c] row. But looking at the numbers already in those positions.
sudo[r][7] : {5,7,2,8,1,9}
sudo[6][c] : {6,8,7,1,9,3,4}
Therefore we're looking for a number from 1..9 that is NOT in: {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}, which we're NEVER going to find.
The algorithm is broken. There is a reason backtracking is used for tasks like this.
Related
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
How can I find all combination of 2 numbers {0,1} in array of 8 length in c,
example
arr[]={0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0}
arr[]={0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1}
arr[]={0,0,0,1,1,0,0,1}
an so on
You can generate all combinations fairly easily using a recursive procedure:
arr = [0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0]
Generate(position)
if position > 8 then
print arr
else
arr[position] = 0
Generate(position+1)
arr[position] = 1
Generate(position+1)
Generate(1)
This will go down 8 levels in the call stack and then print the array [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]. Then it will return to the 7th level, and go down again, printing [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1]. It will repeat this process, toggling each of the higher-order bits in turn until all 256 possibilities are generated. Instead of printing the arrays, you could save the arrays as you go.
Another possibility is to just create the 256 8-bit arrays and use an iterative procedure to toggle the elements in such a way as to guarantee you cover all your bases. An example with 4-bit strings:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 => toggle bits in 4th position => 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 in blocks of size 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 => toggle bits in 3rd position => 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 in blocks of size 2 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 => toggle bits in 2nd position => 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 in blocks of size 4 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 => toggle bits in 1st position => 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 in blocks of size 8 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1
0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I have a matrix that I would like to split into two separate matrices based on a set of conditions.
The input matrix can be generated with the following code:
lbits = 8;
ntags = 10;
k = randi(lbits,1,ntags);
Tag = zeros(lbits,ntags);
Tag(lbits*(find(k)-1) + k)=1;
TagAnswer = Tag';
Which returns:
TagAnswer =
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
My conditions are:
If place of bit '1' is on position lbits/2 or higher, add the row to matrix A
If place of bit '1' is less then position lbits/2, add the row to matrix B
With the above TagAnswer I want the 2nd, 5th and 7th rows to be moved into B and the remaining rows moved into matrix A
Assuming my edit is correct, you can use the row and column outputs of find to index TagAnswer and pull the rows based on your conditions:
% Generate sample data
lbits = 8;
ntags = 10;
k = randi(lbits,1,ntags);
Tag = zeros(lbits,ntags);
Tag(lbits*(find(k)-1) + k)= 1;
TagAnswer = Tag';
% Find bit locations and distribute rows accordingly
[r, c] = find(TagAnswer);
A = TagAnswer(r(c>=(lbits/2)), :);
B = TagAnswer(r(c<(lbits/2)), :);
For my test case I have:
TagAnswer =
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
A =
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
B =
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Edit: Because MATLAB stores data column-major, find also works column-major and will likely lose the row ordering. If it important to preserve the row ordering of TagAnswer in A and B you can use sort after the find call:
[r, sortidx] = sort(r);
c = c(sortidx);
How can I build an array given the requirements below?
for an array NxM of A(i,j):
for A(1,1), A(1,2), A(1,3) = 1 and A(1,4), A(1,5), A(1,6) = 0, repeat these 6 characters for A(1,M-5), A(1,M-4), A(1,M-3) = 1 and A(1,M-2), A(1,M-1), A(1,M) = 0.
for A(2,1), A(2,2) = 1 and A(2,3), A(2,4), A(2,5), A(2,6) = 0, repeat these 6 characters for A(2,M-5), A(2,M-4) = 1 and A(2,M-3) A(2,M-2), A(2,M-1), A(2,M) = 0.
for A(3,1) = 1 and A(3,2), A(3,3), A(3,4), A(3,5), A(3,6) = 0, repeat these 6 characters for A(3,M-5) = 1 and A(2,M-4), A(3,M-3), A(3,M-2), A(3,M-1), A(3,M) = 0
Repeat the above 3 steps for N rows
i.e for a 12x12 array
A = [1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0;
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0;
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0;
1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0;
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0;
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0;
1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0;
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0;
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0;
1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0;
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0;
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0]
I wanted to create an array by using class at the same time which it must be produced as below:
Airline A Airline B Airline C
1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
----------- ----------- -----------
2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0
How can I create this?
I am trying to create a 2D matrix in C (basically a dynamically allocatable 2d array of any given size) in both the most efficient and clean way possible. I had implemented such a thing in a larger project I am working on, but was having issues, and was able to narrow it down to the following.
I decided to malloc a giant array (I called it data), and then make an array of pointers (i called it cell) to be able to address the data in the big array in such a way that would make sense in a two-dimensional context (as in matrix[x][y] instead of data[ugly pointer arithmetic each time].) I thought this would be a good idea because it only calls malloc once, and so it would be faster, also, the allocated memory is in one consecutive block, which I believe (not too knowledgeable here) is a really good thing on some systems because of overhead in keeping track of allocated memory blocks.
#include <math.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
typedef struct {
unsigned int sizeX;
unsigned int sizeY;
int **cell;
int *data; /* FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY */
} matrix;
matrix * matrix_malloc(unsigned int, unsigned int);
void matrix_free(matrix *);
void matrix_zero(matrix *);
void matrix_print(matrix *);
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
int y, x;
matrix *theMatrix = NULL;
if (argc != 3) {
fprintf(stderr, "usage: %s sizeX sizeY\n", argv[0]);
return 1;
}
x = atoi(argv[1]);
y = atoi(argv[2]);
if (x < 10 || y < 10) {
fprintf(stderr, "usage: sizeX and sizeY must be >= 10\n");
return 1;
}
if ((theMatrix = matrix_malloc(x, y)) == NULL)
return 1;
matrix_zero(theMatrix);
/* lots of modification of the contents of the matrix would happen here */
matrix_print(theMatrix);
matrix_free(theMatrix);
return 0;
}
matrix *
matrix_malloc(unsigned int sizeX, unsigned int sizeY)
{
int i;
matrix *mat;
if ((mat = malloc(sizeof(matrix))) == NULL) {
return NULL;
}
if ((mat->data = malloc(sizeX * sizeY * sizeof(int))) == NULL) {
free(mat);
mat = NULL;
return NULL;
}
if ((mat->cell = malloc(sizeX * sizeof(int *))) == NULL) {
free(mat->data);
free(mat);
mat = NULL;
return NULL;
}
mat->sizeX = sizeX;
mat->sizeY = sizeY;
for (i = 0; i < sizeX; i++) {
mat->cell[i] = mat->data + mat->sizeX * i;
}
return mat;
}
void
matrix_free(matrix *mat) {
free(mat->cell);
free(mat->data);
free(mat);
mat = NULL;
}
void
matrix_zero(matrix *mat)
{
memset(mat->data, 0, mat->sizeX * mat->sizeY * sizeof(int));
}
void
matrix_print(matrix *mat)
{
unsigned int x, y;
for (x = 0; x < mat->sizeX; x++) {
for (y = 0; y < mat->sizeY; y++)
printf("%d ", mat->cell[x][y]);
printf("\n");
}
}
When I run the above program as ./a.out 10 10 there is no problem, but when I specify 30 20 instead of 10 10, I run into some issues.
On MacOSX (10.6.7) I get:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 540024880 540024880 540024880 540024880 540024880 808465461 943207474 875896880 875704368 540031032
842216505 926168880 926425140 909719605 540031032 926234424 909325360 875896888 825438256 540160816 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
and then it exits properly.
On OpenBSD (4.7) I get this far:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
and then it just segfaults
My initial thought was that it was just some issue when allocating big enough blocks of memory that they cross page boundaries, but when I use 50 50 as the size, it runs fine.
I've narrowed it down this far, and tried googleing (not quite sure what it is I should be searching for though :| ) and asked a few of my friends, but this has them all stumped.
I found C. Segmentation Fault when function modifies dynamically allocated 2d array int matrix with pointers in C - memory allocation confusion but they were not relevant (as far as I can tell).
If somebody could please point me in the right direction, perhaps point out the problem or point me to some relevant documentation, I would be very grateful.
for (i = 0; i < sizeX; i++) {
mat->cell[i] = mat->data + mat->sizeX * i;
}
One of these SizeX'es needs to be a sizeY.
for (i = 0; i < sizeX; i++) {
mat->cell[i] = mat->data + mat->sizeX * i;
}
Imagine if sizeX is 100 and sizeY is 2. Here, you're laying out sizeX rows, 100 of them, each sizeX integers, 100 of them. Ooops.
That mat->sizeX should be mat->sizeY. You have sizeX rows, each with sizeY elements in them. So you need to skip forward sizeY integers to get to the next row.