I have this problem in a bigger project, in which for some reason the realloc function does absolutely nothing. Am I missing something obvious?
Here is a simplified example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int main()
{
int x = 1, y = 2, z = 3;
int* arr, *arr1;
int** arra;
arra = (int**)malloc(sizeof(int*));
arr = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int));
arr[0] = x;
arra[0] = arr;
arra = (int*)realloc(arra, sizeof(int*) + sizeof(int*));
arr1 = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int));
arr1[0] = y;
arra[1] = arr1;
}
When I debugged, the final arra was {{1}}, even though to my understanding it should be {{1},{2}}.
The debugger does not know that arra is any more than a single pointer. If you want the debugger to print out the contents of arra as an array, you need to walk the elements yourself, or cast it to an array type before printing.
First of all, how do you know that realloc has done nothing? Returning a different pointer is not warranted by realloc(3), as if possible it will try the realloc in place. Having said this, there's no way to know (externally to malloc) that it has done whatever you like or not, as the return value (being the same pointer) gives you no information about the new size.
By the way, how did you check if the sizes where the same or not. You don't show how you did in your code. Indeed, from your code you cannot get any information of the actual size returned by realloc (just see if the program crashed at all or not) If your used the sizeof operator, you are wrong, as you are using it with pointers and the size returned is always the same (the size of a pointer variable, an address) if you used the debugger, it has the same resources as the main program to check the size of whatever realloc returned (that is, nothing again) so, what is the reasoning to conclude that realloc is not working.
Next time, do several mallocs (not only two) and realloc all pointers to values much greater (to avoid optimizations leading to the same pointer returned) like this:
char *a = malloc(10), *b = malloc(10), *c = malloc(10);
char *aa = realloc(a, 10000), *bb = realloc(b, 10000), *cc = realloc(c, 10000);
if (a != aa || b != bb || c != cc)
printf("realloc *changed* the return values "
"(a=%p, aa=%p, b=%p, bb=%p, c=%p, cc=%p)\n",
a, aa, b, bb, c, cc);
else
printf("realloc didn't move the return values\n");
Related
If I'm trying to create a global array to hold an arbitrary number of integers in this case 2 ints. How is it possible that I can assign more numbers to it if I only allocate enough space for just two integers.
int *globalarray;
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int size = 2;
globalarray = malloc(size * sizeof(globalarray[0]));
// How is it possible to initialize this array pass
// the two location that I allocated.
for (size_t i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
globalarray[i] = i;
}
for (size_t i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
printf("%d ", globalarray[i]);
}
printf("%s\n", "");
int arrayLength = sizeof(*globalarray)/sizeof(globalarray[0]);
printf("Array Length: %d\n", arrayLength);
}
When I run this it gives me
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Array Length: 1
So I wanted to know if someone could clarify this for me.
(1) Am I creating the global array correctly?
(2) Why is the array length 1? When I feel that it should be 2 since I malloced the pointer for 2.
And background info on why I want to know this is because I want to create a global array (shared array) so that threads can later access the array and change the values.
How is it possible to initialize this array pass the two location that I allocated.
Short answer: This is undefined behaviour and anything can happen, also the appearance that it worked.
Long answer: You can only initialize the memory you've allocated, it
doesn't matter that the variable is a global variable. C doesn't prevent you from
stepping out of bounds, but if you do, then you get undefined behaviour and anything can happen
(it can "work" but it also can crash immediately or it can crash later).
So if you know that you need 10 ints, then allocate memory for 10 int.
globalarray = malloc(10 * sizeof *globalarray);
if(globalarray == NULL)
{
// error handling
}
And if you later need more, let's say 15, then you can use realloc to increase
the memory allocation:
globalarray = malloc(10 * sizeof *globalarray);
if(globalarray == NULL)
{
// error handling
// do not contiue
}
....
// needs more space
int *tmp = realloc(globalarray, 15 * sizeof *globalarray);
if(tmp == NULL)
{
// error handling
// globalarray still points to the previously allocated
// memory
// do not continue
}
globalarray = tmp;
Am I creating the global array correctly?
Yes and no. It is syntactically correct, but semantically it is not, because you are
allocating space for only 2 ints, but it's clear from the next lines that
you need 10 ints.
Why is the array length 1? When I feel that it should be 2 since I malloced the pointer for 2.
That's because
sizeof(*globalarray)/sizeof(globalarray[0]);
only works with arrays, not pointers. Note also that you are using it wrong in
two ways:
The correct formula is sizeof(globalarray) / sizeof(globalarray[0])
This only works for arrays, not pointers (see below)
We sometimes use the term array as a visual representation when we do stuff
like
int *arr = malloc(size * sizeof *arr)
but arr (and globalarray) are not arrays,
they are pointers. sizeof returns the amount in bytes that the
expression/variable needs. In your case *globalarray has type int and
globalarray[0] has also type int. So you are doing sizeof(int)/sizeof(int)
which is obviously 1.
Like I said, this only works for arrays, for example, this is correct
// not that arr here is not an array
int arr[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
size_t len = sizeof arr / sizeof arr[0]; // returns 4
but this is incorrect:
int *ptr = malloc(4 * sizeof *ptr);
size_t len = sizeof ptr / sizeof ptr[0]; // this is wrong
because sizeof ptr does not returns the total amount of allocated
bytes, it returns the amount of bytes that a pointer needs to be stored in memory. When you are dealing with
pointers, you have to have a separate variable that holds the size.
C does not prevent you from writing outside allocated memory. When coding in C it is of the utmost importance that you manage your memory properly.
For your second question, this is how you would want to allocate your buffer:
globalarray = malloc(sizeof(int) * size);
And if you are on an older version of C than c11:
globalarray = (int*) malloc(sizeof(int) * size);
I'm having some trouble with using the malloc/realloc command with arrays. I've created a small array with some integers in it, and tried to add one value to it by expanding the size with realloc and adding the value, but when I do that the 0 index's value is not preserved and is seen as garbage.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(){
int n;
printf("Enter size of array\n");
scanf("%d",&n);
int *A = malloc(n*sizeof(int));
for(int i = 0; i < n; i++){
A[i] = i + 1;
}
*A = realloc(A, sizeof(A)+ sizeof(int));
A[n] = 1234;
for(int i = 0; i < n + 1; i++){
printf("%d\n",A[i]);
}
return 0;
}
and when i run the program this happens:
Enter size of array
5
14643216
2
3
4
5
1234
Does anyone know why the 0 index of the array is getting this value and not 1?
$ gcc a.c
a.c: In function ‘main’:
a.c:12:12: warning: assignment makes integer from pointer without a cast [-Wint-conversion]
*A = realloc(A, sizeof(A)+ sizeof(int));
^
Make sure to configure your compiler to emit warnings on code that looks suspicious. Any remotely decent compiler would raise at least a warning, if not an error, on this line. realloc returns a pointer, which you're trying to assign to an int object.
You need to assign the resulting pointer to A, not *A. Furthermore, there's another error, which compilers can't warn you about. sizeof(A)+ sizeof(int) is too small, and does not make much sense in context. Note that sizeof(A) is the size of the pointer A. There's no way to use sizeof to find the number of items in the array that A points to, because sizeof relies on compile-time information. To extend the array by one element, you need to add sizeof(int) to the current allocated size, which is n*sizeof(int), i.e. the new size should be (n+1) * sizeof(int).
In addition, it would be better to use sizeof(*A) than sizeof(int). The two are equivalent, but sizeof(*A) has the advantage that it'll still be correct if you decide to change the array elements, e.g. to make them long.
A = realloc(A, (n+1) * sizeof(*A));
Write A = realloc(A, (n + 1) * sizeof(int)); instead of *A = realloc(A, sizeof(A)+ sizeof(int));
*A = ... will overwrite the value of the first index with a "address value" if A is not moved to another place in memory (undefined behaviour otherwise).
Note that sizeof(A) is a constant value (probably 8, and not the amount of memory allocated previously), such that you had a good chance that realloc did not move the memory.
In C, I want to fill a dynamic array with each character of a file in each of his boxes.
But instead, when I print my array I have:
0 = []
1 = []
2 = []
3 = []
4 = []
5 = []
6 = []
7 = []
8 = []
9 = []
I have no compilation errors, but valgrind said that I have a:
Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
in my main at the printf.
That's strange, because even with an initialisation in my main:
array_valid_char = NULL;
valgrind keeps getting me that error.
And even if I change to:
printf("%d = [%d] \n", i, array_valid_char[i]);
the display is the same.
Here is my code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int* f(char* name_file_in)
{
FILE *file_in;
int* array_valid_char = malloc(10 * sizeof(int*));
int read_char;
file_in = fopen(name_file_in,"rb");
if(file_in)
{
while ((read_char = fgetc(file_in)) != EOF)
{
*(array_valid_char++) = read_char;
}
}
if(file_in){fclose(file_in);}
return array_valid_char;
}
int main(int argc,char* argv[])
{
int *array_valid_char = malloc(10 * sizeof(int*));
array_valid_char = f(argv[1]);
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
printf("%d = [%c] \n", i, array_valid_char[i]);
}
return(0);
}
What is wrong with my code?
You have to keep track of the beginning of the allocated memory which you didn't. (That original allocated chunks address should be returned ).
int* array_valid_char = malloc(10 * sizeof(int*));
int *st = array_valid_char ;
...
return st;
Also you have memory leak - you can omit the malloc in main().
Also you need to free the dynamically allocated memory when you are done working with it.
free(array_valid_char);
And also the memory allocation part would be
int* array_valid_char = malloc(10 * sizeof(int));
or
int* array_valid_char = malloc(10 * sizeof(*array_valid_char));
You want array of int.
Among other points check the return value of malloc and handle it properly.
The correct way to code would be to index into the allocated memory and check whether we are reaching limit of what we allocated - if it is so then reallocate.
Many of us confine ourselves with the thought that sizeof( *ptr)*10
is only good enough for the clear syntax etc but knowing that sizeof returns size_t when multiplied this with other value it is less likely to overflow as in opposed to writing the other way round(which was having int arithmetic) that's a benefit. (chux)
For example: sizeof(something)*int*int will do result in operation with size_t value which will less likely to overflow that int*int*sizeof(int). In second case int*int may overflow.(more likely)
There are some problems in your code:
With *(array_valid_char++), you move your pointer each time you pass on the loop. If you want to use this method, you need to keep a track on the beginning of your array with an other variable. You can also use an iterator array_valid_char[i] that starts at 0 and increments it at each loop turn.
In your main, you malloc your array int *array_valid_char = malloc(10 * sizeof(int*)); but you override it just after with array_valid_char = f(argv[1]);. If you malloc your array in a function and send it back with a return, the memory is still allocated.
In printf, %d is for display a number and %c is for display a character. In your case, you need to use %c. In the other case, you will see the ASCII value of your character.
By the way, you also use an int array to receive char array. It is not a problem now but for some optimisation, you can use char array to take less memory.
Also, don't forget to free the memory you have used when you don't use it anymore, it could be useful in bigger programs.
Using what I have learned here: How to use realloc in a function in C, I wrote this program.
int data_length; // Keeps track of length of the dynamic array.
int n; // Keeps track of the number of elements in dynamic array.
void add(int x, int data[], int** test)
{
n++;
if (n > data_length)
{
data_length++;
*test = realloc(*test, data_length * sizeof (int));
}
data[n-1] = x;
}
int main(void)
{
int *data = malloc(2 * sizeof *data);
data_length = 2; // Set the initial values.
n = 0;
add(0,data,&data);
add(1,data,&data);
add(2,data,&data);
return 0;
}
The goal of the program is to have a dynamic array data that I can keep adding values to. When I try to add a value to data, if it is full, the length of the array is increased by using realloc.
Question
This program compiles and does not crash when run. However, printing out data[0],data[1],data[2] gives 0,1,0. The number 2 was not added to the array.
Is this due to my wrong use of realloc?
Additional Info
This program will be used later on with a varying number of "add" and possibly a "remove" function. Also, I know realloc should be checked to see if it failed (is NULL) but that has been left out here for simplicity.
I am still learning and experimenting with C. Thanks for your patience.
Your problem is in your utilisation of data, because it points on the old array's address. Then, when your call realloc, this area is freed. So you are trying to access to an invalid address on the next instruction: this leads to an undefined behavior.
Also you don't need to use this data pointer. test is sufficient.
(*test)[n-1] = x;
You don't need to pass data twice to add.
You could code
void add(int x, int** ptr)
{
n++;
int *data = *ptr;
if (n > data_length) {
data_length++;
*ptr = data = realloc(oldata, data_length * sizeof (int));
if (!data)
perror("realloc failed), exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
data [n-1] = x;
}
but that is very inefficient, you should call realloc only once in a while. You could for instance have
data_length = 3*data_length/2 + 5;
*ptr = data = realloc(oldata, data_length * sizeof (int));
Let's take a look at the POSIX realloc specification.
The description says:
If the new size of the memory object would require movement of the object, the space for the previous instantiation of the object is freed.
The return value (emphasis added) mentions:
Upon successful completion with a size not equal to 0, realloc() returns a pointer to the (possibly moved) allocated space.
You can check to see if the pointer changes.
int *old;
old = *test;
*test = realloc(*test, data_length * sizeof(int));
if (*test != old)
printf("Pointer changed from %p to %p\n", old, *test);
This possible change can interact badly because your code refers to the "same" memory by two different names, data and *test. If *test changes, data still points to the old chunk of memory.
I want to create an integer pointer p, allocate memory for a 10-element array, and then fill each element with the value of 5. Here's my code:
//Allocate memory for a 10-element integer array.
int array[10];
int *p = (int *)malloc( sizeof(array) );
//Fill each element with the value of 5.
int i = 0;
printf("Size of array: %d\n", sizeof(array));
while (i < sizeof(array)){
*p = 5;
printf("Current value of array: %p\n", *p);
*p += sizeof(int);
i += sizeof(int);
}
I've added some print statements around this code, but I'm not sure if it's actually filling each element with the value of 5.
So, is my code working correctly? Thanks for your time.
First:
*p += sizeof(int);
This takes the contents of what p points to and adds the size of an integer to it. That doesn't make much sense. What you probably want is just:
p++;
This makes p point to the next object.
But the problem is that p contains your only copy of the pointer to the first object. So if you change its value, you won't be able to access the memory anymore because you won't have a pointer to it. (So you should save a copy of the original value returned from malloc somewhere. If nothing else, you'll eventually need it to pass to free.)
while (i < sizeof(array)){
This doesn't make sense. You don't want to loop a number of times equal to the number of bytes the array occupies.
Lastly, you don't need the array for anything. Just remove it and use:
int *p = malloc(10 * sizeof(int));
For C, don't cast the return value of malloc. It's not needed and can mask other problems such as failing to include the correct headers. For the while loop, just keep track of the number of elements in a separate variable.
Here's a more idiomatic way of doing things:
/* Just allocate the array into your pointer */
int arraySize = 10;
int *p = malloc(sizeof(int) * arraySize);
printf("Size of array: %d\n", arraySize);
/* Use a for loop to iterate over the array */
int i;
for (i = 0; i < arraySize; ++i)
{
p[i] = 5;
printf("Value of index %d in the array: %d\n", i, p[i]);
}
Note that you need to keep track of your array size separately, either in a variable (as I have done) or a macro (#define statement) or just with the integer literal. Using the integer literal is error-prone, however, because if you need to change the array size later, you need to change more lines of code.
sizeof of an array returns the number of bytes the array occupies, in bytes.
int *p = (int *)malloc( sizeof(array) );
If you call malloc, you must #include <stdlib.h>. Also, the cast is unnecessary and can introduce dangerous bugs, especially when paired with the missing malloc definition.
If you increment a pointer by one, you reach the next element of the pointer's type. Therefore, you should write the bottom part as:
for (int i = 0;i < sizeof(array) / sizeof(array[0]);i++){
*p = 5;
p++;
}
*p += sizeof(int);
should be
p += 1;
since the pointer is of type int *
also the array size should be calculated like this:
sizeof (array) / sizeof (array[0]);
and indeed, the array is not needed for your code.
Nope it isn't. The following code will however. You should read up on pointer arithmetic. p + 1 is the next integer (this is one of the reasons why pointers have types). Also remember if you change the value of p it will no longer point to the beginning of your memory.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <assert.h>
#define LEN 10
int main(void)
{
/* Allocate memory for a 10-element integer array. */
int array[LEN];
int i;
int *p;
int *tmp;
p = malloc(sizeof(array));
assert(p != NULL);
/* Fill each element with the value of 5. */
printf("Size of array: %d bytes\n", (int)sizeof(array));
for(i = 0, tmp = p; i < LEN; tmp++, i++) *tmp = 5;
for(i = 0, tmp = p; i < LEN; i++) printf("%d\n", tmp[i]);
free(p);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
//Allocate memory for a 10-element integer array.
int array[10];
int *p = (int *)malloc( sizeof(array) );
At this point you have allocated twice as much memory -- space for ten integers in the array allocated on the stack, and space for ten integers allocated on the heap. In a "real" program that needed to allocate space for ten integers and stack allocation wasn't the right thing to do, the allocation would be done like this:
int *p = malloc(10 * sizeof(int));
Note that there is no need to cast the return value from malloc(3). I expect you forgot to include the <stdlib> header, which would have properly prototyped the function, and given you the correct output. (Without the prototype in the header, the C compiler assumes the function would return an int, and the cast makes it treat it as a pointer instead. The cast hasn't been necessary for twenty years.)
Furthermore, be vary wary of learning the habit sizeof(array). This will work in code where the array is allocated in the same block as the sizeof() keyword, but it will fail when used like this:
int foo(char bar[]) {
int length = sizeof(bar); /* BUG */
}
It'll look correct, but sizeof() will in fact see an char * instead of the full array. C's new Variable Length Array support is keen, but not to be mistaken with the arrays that know their size available in many other langauges.
//Fill each element with the value of 5.
int i = 0;
printf("Size of array: %d\n", sizeof(array));
while (i < sizeof(array)){
*p = 5;
*p += sizeof(int);
Aha! Someone else who has the same trouble with C pointers that I did! I presume you used to write mostly assembly code and had to increment your pointers yourself? :) The compiler knows the type of objects that p points to (int *p), so it'll properly move the pointer by the correct number of bytes if you just write p++. If you swap your code to using long or long long or float or double or long double or struct very_long_integers, the compiler will always do the right thing with p++.
i += sizeof(int);
}
While that's not wrong, it would certainly be more idiomatic to re-write the last loop a little:
for (i=0; i<array_length; i++)
p[i] = 5;
Of course, you'll have to store the array length into a variable or #define it, but it's easier to do this than rely on a sometimes-finicky calculation of the array length.
Update
After reading the other (excellent) answers, I realize I forgot to mention that since p is your only reference to the array, it'd be best to not update p without storing a copy of its value somewhere. My little 'idiomatic' rewrite side-steps the issue but doesn't point out why using subscription is more idiomatic than incrementing the pointer -- and this is one reason why the subscription is preferred. I also prefer the subscription because it is often far easier to reason about code where the base of an array doesn't change. (It Depends.)
//allocate an array of 10 elements on the stack
int array[10];
//allocate an array of 10 elements on the heap. p points at them
int *p = (int *)malloc( sizeof(array) );
// i equals 0
int i = 0;
//while i is less than 40
while (i < sizeof(array)){
//the first element of the dynamic array is five
*p = 5;
// the first element of the dynamic array is nine!
*p += sizeof(int);
// incrememnt i by 4
i += sizeof(int);
}
This sets the first element of the array to nine, 10 times. It looks like you want something more like:
//when you get something from malloc,
// make sure it's type is "____ * const" so
// you don't accidentally lose it
int * const p = (int *)malloc( 10*sizeof(int) );
for (int i=0; i<10; ++i)
p[i] = 5;
A ___ * const prevents you from changing p, so that it will always point to the data that was allocated. This means free(p); will always work. If you change p, you can't release the memory, and you get a memory leak.