This question already has answers here:
Difference between char[] and char * in C [duplicate]
(3 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
I think I know the answer to my own question but I would like to have confirmation that I understand this perfectly.
I wrote a function that returns a string. I pass a char* as a parameter, and the function modifies the pointer.
It works fine and here is the code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
void get_file_name(char* file_name_out)
{
char file_name[12+1];
char dir_name[50+12+1];
strcpy(file_name, "name.xml");
strcpy(dir_name, "/home/user/foo/bar/");
strcat(dir_name, file_name);
strcpy(file_name_out, dir_name); // Clarity - equivalent to a return
}
int main()
{
char file_name[100];
get_file_name(file_name);
printf(file_name);
return 0;
}
But if I replace char file_name[100]; by char *filename; or char *filename = "";, I get a segmentation fault in strcpy().
I am not sure why ?
My function takes a char* as a parameter and so does strcpy().
As far as I understand, char *filename = ""; creates a read-only string. strcpy() is then trying to write into a read-only variable, which is not allowed so the error makes sense.
But what happens when I write char *filename; ? My guess is that enough space to fit a pointer to a char is allocated on the stack, so I could write only one single character where my file_name_out points. A call to strcpy() would try to write at least 2, hence the error.
It would explain why the following code compiles and yields the expected output:
void foo(char* a, char* b)
{
*a = *b;
}
int main()
{
char a = 'A', b = 'B';
printf("a = %c, b = %c\n", a, b);
foo(&a, &b);
printf("a = %c, b = %c\n", a, b);
return 0;
}
On the other hand, if I use char file_name[100];, I allocate enough room on the stack for 100 characters, so strcpy() can happily write into file_name_out.
Am I right ?
As far as I understand, char *filename = ""; creates a read-only
string. strcpy() is then trying to write into a read-only variable,
which is not allowed so the error makes sense.
Yes, that's right. It is inherently different from declaring a character array. Initializing a character pointer to a string literal makes it read-only; attempting to change the contents of the string leads to UB.
But what happens when I write char *filename; ? My guess is that
enough space to fit a pointer to a char is allocated on the stack, so
I could write only one single character into my file_name_out
variable.
You allocate enough space to store a pointer to a character, and that's it. You can't write to *filename, not even a single character, because you didn't allocate space to store the contents pointed to by *filename. If you want to change the contents pointed to by filename, first you must initialize it to point to somewhere valid.
I think the issue here is that
char string[100];
allocates memory to string - which you can access using string as pointer
but
char * string;
does not allocate any memory to string so you get a seg fault.
to get memory you could use
string = calloc(100,sizeo(char));
for example, but you would need to remember at the end to free the memory with
free(string);
or you could get a memory leak.
another memory allocation route is with malloc
So in summary
char string[100];
is equivalent to
char * string;
string = calloc(100,sizeo(char));
...
free(string);
although strictly speaking calloc initializes all elements to zero, whereas in the string[100] decalaration the array elements are undefined unless you use
string[100]={}
if you use malloc instead to grad the memory the contents are undefined.
Another point made by #PaulRooney is that char string[100] gives memory allocation on the stack whereas calloc uses the heap. For more information about the heap and stack see this question and answers...
char file_name[100]; creates a contiguous array of 100 chars. In this case file_name is a pointer of type (char*) which points to the first element in the array.
char* file_name; creates a pointer. However, it is not initialized to a particular memory address. Further, this expression does not allocate memory.
char *filename;
Allocate nothing. Its just a pointer pointing to an unspecified location (the value is whatever was in that memory previously). Using this pointer will never work as it probably points outside the memory range your program is allowed to use.
char *filename = "";
Points to a piece of the programs data segment. As you already said it's read only and so attempting to change it leads to the segfault.
In your final example you are dealing with single char values, not strings of char values and your function foo treats them as such. So there is no issue with the length of buffers the char* values point to.
Related
I just started to learn memory management in C, and I didn't understand something. I want to allocate memory to a buffer that holds 12 bytes. which is the exact size of Hello World! without null terminator.
Then I want to append a string to the current string with strcat, and of course I cannot do that because I will get core dumped error.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
char mystr[12] = "Hello World!";
# allocate memory to mystr?
char *ptr = (char*) malloc(13 * sizeof(char));
strcat(mystr, "Hello");
return 0;
}
So, I don't know how can I allocate memory to the mystr variable if malloc doesn't take any other arguments except the target size.
I don't know how can I allocate memory to the mystr variable if malloc doesn't take any other arguments except the target size.
It is not possible to allocate extra memory to an array. Instead, what you want to do is allocate a new block of memory, copying the original string into the beginning of that memory (strcpy), then append the rest (strcat):
char *p = (char*) malloc((12 + 5 + 1) * sizeof(char));
strcpy(p, myptr);
strcat(p, "Hello");
12 for the first string, plus 5 for the second, plus one for the null-terminator.
Of course, since you know the final size, you could also simply allocate a big enough array instead of using malloc (and you can also use memcpy, too).
The problem should be that a string in C always end with a NULL character (also noted '\0'), so your string is actually 13 characters long. (That character is always automatically added with string literals and serves at telling where the string stops, because a string doesn't have a fixed length.)
So the strcat tries to read the string Hello world! followed by garbage (since the null-terminator is not included in the string).
P.S.: the error is not the core dumped but the Segmentation fault that precedes it, and this tells you that you are trying to change something in a segment you are not supposed to change (or execute/read something you are not supposed to -- this is a security feature).
Edit: after modifying the string mystr, you also need to change the length you allocate (in the malloc: use 13 * sizeof(char), or more simply here in this case sizeof(mystr)).
P.S. 2: also comments in C are started by //, not # (those are preprocessor directives).
you cant change the size of the array. mystr has to be also dynamically allocated.
int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
const char *ptr = "Hello World!";
const char *ptr2 = "hello";
char *mystr = malloc(strlen(ptr)+1);
strcpy(mystr, ptr);
mystr = realloc(mystr, strlen(mystr) + strlen(ptr2) + 1);
strcat(mystr, ptr2);
return 0;
}
I have this program:
#include<stdio.h>
void copy_string(char string1[], char string2[]){
int counter=0;
while(string1[counter]!='\0'){
string2[counter] = string1[counter];
counter++;
}
string2[counter] = '\0';
}
int main() {
char* myString = "Hello there!";
char* myStringCopy;
copy_string(myString, myStringCopy);
printf("%s", myStringCopy);
}
My question is, why isn't it working unless I declare myStringCopy as a fixed-size variable (char myStringCopy[12];)? Shouldn't it work if I add a \0 character after the copy as I'm doing?
It can work by doing char* myStringCopy as long as you allocate memory space for it.
for example
char* myStringCopy
myStringCopy = malloc(sizeof(char) * (strlen(myString)+1))
I might be mistaken about the +1 but I think it is like this.
char myStringCopy[12]; tells the compiler to create an array of 12 char. When myStringCopy is passed to copy_string, this array is automatically converted to a pointer to its first element, so copy_string receives a pointer to the characters.
char *myStringCopy; tells the compiler to create a pointer to char. The compiler creates this pointer, including providing memory for it, but it does not set the value of the pointer. When this pointer is passed to copy_string, copy_string does not receive a valid value.
To make char *myStringCopy; work, you must allocate memory (which you can do with malloc). For example, you could use:
char *myStringCopy;
myStringCopy = malloc(13 * sizeof *myStringCopy);
if (myStringCopy == NULL)
{
fprintf(stderr, "Error, the malloc did not work.\n");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
Also, note that 12 is not enough. The string “Hello there!” contains 12 characters, but it also includes a terminating null character. You must provide space for the null character. char myStringCopy[12]; appeared to work, but copy_string was actually writing a thirteenth character beyond the array, damaging something else in your program.
The problem is that you don't have room for mystringCopy
You need to reserve space first:
char* myString = "Hello there!";
char* myStringCopy = malloc(strlen(myString) + 1);
char* myStringCopy;
This is only pointer to char*. You must first allocate memory for myStringCopy, before start copy. When you declare it like this:
char myStringCopy[12];
compiler allocate enough memory in stack.
I am a novice programmer and I hagly appreciate any advice with my problem here.
I've made a procedure that gets a string in buffer and parses it in three cunks, separated by the first 2 ";".
What I tried to do is to pass 3 char pointers in where I will store my parsed string. But all I got in the calling function is memory garbage. What am I doing wrong?
void parseomensaje(char buf[256], char **idNodo, char **idMensaje, char **mensaje){
char *temp;
temp=(char *)malloc(sizeof(buf));
strcpy(temp, buf);
printf("\ntemp adentro de la funcion = %s\n", temp);
idNodo = strtok (temp,";");
idMensaje = strtok (NULL, ";");
mensaje = strtok (NULL, "\0");
printf("\nADENTRO\nidNodo: %s\nidMensaje: %s\nmensaje: %s", idNodo, idMensaje, mensaje);
}
this function is called this way:
char *idnod=NULL;
char *idmen=NULL;
char *men=NULL;
idnod=(char *)malloc(sizeof(buffer));
idmen=(char *)malloc(sizeof(buffer));
men=(char *)malloc(sizeof(buffer));
parseomensaje (buffer, &idmen, &idnod, &men);
after parseomensaje is executed buffer contains its original string, but idmen, idnod and men are blank.
I was reading from tutorials that pointers names are pointers itself, so it is the same thing as passing a parameter by reference, but in case of a string I need to pass the pointer address to a pointer to pointer...
I was reading it from here, but I'm still trying to figure it out.
PD: I apologize for my English, please feel free to point any mistakes in my writing. :)
This is incorrect:
char *temp;
temp=(char *)malloc(sizeof(buf));
as the array will degrade to a char* within the function, so only sizeof(char*) bytes are being allocated (typically 4 or 8 bytes). If the actually length of buf is greater than 4 or 8 bytes then the program has undefined behaviour as the strcpy() will be writing beyond the bounds of the array. Basically:
void parseomensaje(char buf[256], char **idNodo, char **idMensaje, char **mensaje){
is equivalent to:
void parseomensaje(char* buf, char **idNodo, char **idMensaje, char **mensaje){
If you are, as you say, a novice programmer I would recommend avoiding dynamic memory allocation until you get more comfortable with the language. Modify the program to use fixed sized arrays instead of dynamically allocated memory (and prevent writing beyond the bounds of the arrays). Once you have that working and fully understand it then attempt to use dynamically allocated memory.
First of all you have multiple memory leaks in your program. Consider freeing every single memory chunk you've allocated thanks to malloc once you don't need them anymore.
As regard your function:
void parseomensaje(char buf[256], char **idNodo, char **idMensaje, char **mensaje)
Why do you pass char** pointers on your function? Pass char* instead. Because strtok is declared this way:
char *strtok(char *str, const char *delim);
Moreover, you don't need to allocate any memory before calling parseomensaje since strtok returns a pointer on your own memory, not new allocated one.
I'm am trying to write a program that reads in a series of strings from a text file and stores these in an array of strings, dynamically allocating memory for each element. My plan was to store each string in an array using a pointer and then grow the array size as more were read in. I am having trouble to understand why my test code below is not working. Is this a workable idea?
char *aPtr;
aPtr =(char*)malloc(sizeof(char));
aPtr[0]="This is a test";
printf("%s",aPtr[0]);
In C a string is a char*. A dynamic array of type T is represented as a pointer to T, so for char* that would be char**, not simply a char* the way you declared it.
The compiler, no doubt, has issued some warnings about it. Pay attention to these warnings, very often they help you understand what to do.
Here is how you can start your testing:
char **aPtr;
int len = 1; // Start with 1 string
aPtr = malloc(sizeof(char*) * len); // Do not cast malloc in C
aPtr[0] = "This is a test";
printf("%s",aPtr[0]); // This should work now.
char *str; //single pointer
With this you can store one string.
To store array of strings you Need two dimensional character array
or else array of character pointers or else double pointer
char str[10][50]; //two dimensional character array
If you declare like this you need not allocate memory as this is static declaration
char *str[10]; //array of pointers
Here you need to allocate memory for each pointer
loop through array to allocate memory for each pointer
for(i=0;i<10;i++)
str[i]=malloc(SIZE);
char **str; //double pointer
Here you need to allocate memory for Number of pointers and then allocate memory for each pointer .
str=malloc( sizeof(char *)*10);
And then loop through array allocate memory for each pointer
for(i=0;i<10;i++)
str[i]=malloc(SIZE);
char * aPtr;
is as pointer to a character, to which you allocated memory to hold exactly 1 character.
Doing
aPrt[0] = "test";
you address the memory for this one characters and try to store the address of the literal "test" to it. This will fail as this address most likley is wider then a character.
A fix to your code would be to allocate memory for a pointer to a character.
char ** aPtr = malloc(sizeof(char *));
aPtr[0] = "test";
printf("%s", aPtr[0]);
Are more elegant and more over robust approach would be to allocate the same (as well as adding the mandatory error checking) by doing:
char ** aPtr = malloc(sizeof *aPtr);
if (NULL == aPtr)
{
perror("malloc() failed");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
...
You are doing it totally wrong. The correct version of your code should be like this:
int main ()
{
char *aPtr;
aPtr =(char*)malloc(20*sizeof(char));
aPtr ="This is a test";
printf("%s",aPtr);
}
You can use pointer array. if you want to store multiple string. Yes I know using for loop will be easy. But I am trying to explain in simple way even a beginner can understand.
int main ()
{
char *aPtr[10];
aPtr[0] =(char*)malloc(20*sizeof(char));
aPtr[0] ="This is a test";
aPtr[1] =(char*)malloc(20*sizeof(char));
aPtr[1] ="This is a test2";
printf("%s\n%s\n",aPtr[0],aPtr[1]);
}
So basically strcpy assigns the address of the 2nd argument to the 1st, but how does it do it with an array as the first argument? like in my program, i tried changing the address of the array but unfortunately it wont compile. So I had to resort to making a character pointer variable to assign the return value of capitalize. Is there something I'm misunderstanding?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
typedef char string[20];
char *Capitalize(char *str)
{
int i;
char *temp;
temp = malloc(sizeof(char)*(int)(strlen(str)+1));
for(i = 0;i < strlen(str);i++)
{
if(*(str+i) >= 'a' && *(str+i)<= 'z')
*(temp+i) = *(str+i) - 32;
else
*(temp+i) = *(str+i);
}
*(temp+i) = '\0';
return temp;
}
int main(void)
{
string word;
printf("Enter word to capitalize: ");
scanf("%19s",word);
word = Capitalize(word);
printf("%s",word);
return 0;
}
strcpy() makes a copy, just like the name implies. it's perfectly legal to copy a string in to an array.
When you make an initialization of an array such as:
char myarr[] = "hello";
You're actually copying the characters into the array.
You seem to be confusing arrays with pointers (see here for some reason you can't treat them the same)
In C, qualifying an array by name without an indexer, is equivalent to specifying a pointer to the memory address of the first element in the array, that is why you can pass as a parameter an array to functions like strcpy.
char * strcpy ( char * destination, const char * source );
strcpy will copy whatever series of characters are found, starting at memory address specified by source, to the memory address specified by destination, until a null character (0) is found (this null character is also copied to the destination buffer).
The address values specified in the parameters are not modified, they just specify from where in memory to copy and where to. It is important that destination is pointing to a memory buffer (can be a char array or a block of memory requested via malloc) with enough capacity for the copied string to fit, otherwise a buffer underrun will occur (you will write characters past the end of your buffer) and your program might crash or behave in a weird way.
Hope I have been clear and not confused you more with my explanation ;)
The thing you seem to be missing is that in c/c++ strings ARE arrays, in most practical respects declaring
char c[] = "hello";
and
char* c = "hello";
is the same thing, all strcpy does is copy the characters into the destination memory, whether that memory is allocated as an array (presumably on the stack) or pointer (presumably on the heap);it does not make a difference.