What is causing this segfault? - c

I get a segfault after calling mygets(). Here is my code:
#include <termios.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct _charlist{
char ch;
struct _charlist *next;
}charlist;
static struct termios old, new;
void mygets(char** p);
char getche(void);
char getch_(int echo);
void resetTermios(void);
void initTermios(int echo);
int main(void){
char *p;
printf("\nWho loves orange soda?: ");
mygets(&p);
printf("'%s' loves orange soda!", p);
}
void mygets(char** p){
char c;
charlist *root, *curr;
unsigned i, count=0;
root=NULL;
while((c = getche()) != '\n'){
count++;
if(!root){
root = (charlist*) malloc(sizeof(charlist));
root->ch = c;
root->next = NULL;
curr = root;
}
else{
curr
->next = (charlist*) malloc(sizeof(charlist));
curr->next->ch = c;
curr->next->next = NULL;
curr = curr->next;
}
}
//now request string space.
*p = (char*) malloc((count+1)*sizeof(char));
printf("\np is now malloced"); //This line doesn't get printed!
//move linked list into string space.
curr = root;
for(i=0; i<=count; i++){
*p[i] = curr->ch;
curr = curr->next;
}
//null-terminate the string.
*p[i] = '\0';
}
Can someone tell me why I get a segfault?
I can't post this question unless the ratio of code to question is lower than some arbitrary threshold. Therefore, there now follows the first paragraph of Alice in Wonderland, for your consideration.
Alice was beginning to get very tired of sitting by her sister on the
bank, and of having nothing to do: once or twice she had peeped into
the book her sister was reading, but it had no pictures or
conversations in it, 'and what is the use of a book,' thought Alice
'without pictures or conversation?'

When func is called, it is passed a copy of the local variable p in main. This copy is then assigned the malloced area in func. The original p in the main is never modified, so its contents remain undefined, causing a segmentation fault when printf dereferences p in order to print the string.
You may want func to return a char* pointing to the newly malloc'd area.

You pass the argument to the function by value. So according to the function declaration
void func(char* p);
parameter p is a local variable of the function that will be destroyed after exiting the function. Any changes of the local variable do not influence on the argument.
You could define the function the following ways
char * func(){
unsigned count = 10;
char *p = (char*) malloc(sizeof(char)*(count+1));
//p is given a string after this, but problem is the above line.
return p;
}
and call it as
p = funct();
or
void func(char ** p){
unsigned count = 10;
*p = (char*) malloc(sizeof(char)*(count+1));
//p is given a string after this, but problem is the above line.
}
and call it as
func( &p );

The problem is with:
*p[i] = curr->ch;
Should be:
(*p)[i] = curr->ch;
You want to access the i'th character of where p is pointing to. Not dereference the ith pointer in an array of pointers.
Same problem with *p[i] = '\0'; later.
Also you did not malloc enough space, as your loop writes count + 1 characters and then you write an extra null terminator, so you should either malloc count + 2 or adjust your loop to finish at i<count, not i<=count. (probably the latter).
Also, it'd be useful to check curr != NULL before dereferencing it, so that if you do have an off-by-one error then you don't get undefined behaviour.

Related

Why am I getting a segmentation fault when I try to assign an element from an array to a same type value in my data structure in C?

I'm writing a program that is supposed to assign characters from a buffer into a hash-table. I ran valgrind on my program and it signals to a particular line (tmp->word = buffer[i];) and keeps telling me there is a segmentation fault there.
I tried hardcoding the problem line to (tmp->word = 'c';) but the compiler rejected that implementation. I checked to see if the buffer array was initialized, which it was. The program compiles when the problem line is changed to (tmp->word = buffer[i];) but that leads back to a segmentation fault. I have also tried printing the character field in my data structure after I assign it, but the segmentation fault occurs before that can happen. This is what I've written so far. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
#include <ctype.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
typedef struct node
{
struct node* next;
char word;
}
node;
void unload(node* current);
int main(void)
{
node* table[26];
char buffer[5] = "Hello";
printf("%s\n", buffer);
int index = tolower(buffer[0]) - 'a';
node* tmp = table[index];
for(int i = 0, n = strlen(buffer); i < n - 1; tmp = tmp->next)
{
tmp->word = buffer[i];
printf("%c\n", tmp->word);
i++;
}
//follows word that was input
index = tolower(buffer[0]) - 'a';
for(int j = 0; j < 1; j++)
{
tmp = table[index]->next;
unload(tmp);
}
}
void unload(node* current)
{
if (current->next != NULL)
{
unload(current->next);
}
free(current);
}
As was mentioned before in the comments and answer, my array of pointers wasn't initialized. This was a part of the main problem I had which was experiencing a segmentation fault when I tried to assign table[i]->word and table[i]->next a value. No memory was allocated for the nodes in the table so I went and did that which fixed most the problems! Something I learned, however, is that I could not assign a string to table[i]->word which is an array of characters in my now less buggy program, and instead had to use strcpy to read a string into that memory space (please correct me if I'm wrong on that). Thank you all for your help and advice, it was really useful! Posted below is the version of my program that actually works save for a conditional that I need to implement thanks to your guys' help! Again, thank you very much!
#include <ctype.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <cs50.h>
#define LENGTH 45
#define CAPACITY 26
typedef struct node
{
struct node* next;
char word[LENGTH + 1];
}
node;
int hash(char* current);
void unload(node* current);
int main(void)
{
//const unsigned int N = 26;
node* table[CAPACITY];
for(int i = 0; i < CAPACITY; i++)
{
table[i] = malloc(sizeof(node)); // this was table[i]->next before. I didn't allocate memory for this node and then tried to defrefernce to a field in a node I though existed
if(table[i] == NULL)
{
printf("Could not allocate memory for hashtable node");
for(int j = 0; j < CAPACITY; j++)
{
unload(table[i]);
}
return 1;
}
table[i]->next = NULL; //just reinitializing the value here so that its not a garbage value
//table[i]->word = "NULL";
}
int q = 0;
while(q < 3) //ths will be chnaged so that we're reading from a file into a buffer and that get_string is gone, hash() stays tho
{
char* name = get_string("Here: ");
int index = hash(name);
if(table[index]->next == NULL)
{
node* cursor = malloc(sizeof(node)); //I'm not executing this if the hash code is the same
table[index]->next = cursor;
strcpy(cursor->word, name); //for some reason you can't just assign a value to an element in an array in a data structure, seems that you need to read the data you want to assign into the location of the element
//cursor->word = name;
cursor->next = NULL;
printf("%s\n", cursor->word);
}
q++;
}
for(int i = 0; i < CAPACITY; i++)
{
unload(table[i]); //wonder why I don't need to do table[i]->next? does this not free the hash table after the first iteration?
// the answer to above is because we are only freeing the node which is that element in the array, not the array itself
}
strcpy(table[6]->word, "Zebra");
printf("%lu\n", sizeof(table[6]));
printf("%s\n", table[6]->word);
/*for(int i = 0; i < CAPACITY; i++)
{
unload(table[i]); //only problem here is that it will eventually free the hash table itself after the first linked list
}*/
}
int hash(char* current)
{
int index = tolower(current[0]) - 'a';
return index;
}
void unload(node* current)
{
if (current->next != NULL)
{
unload(current->next);
}
free(current);
}
As is the comments the main problem is an array of uninitialized pointers. As "intuitive way" while you are coding you may think the once you typed node* table[26]; as int type variables, this will be set to NULL automatically as a pattern behavior or something.But it points to a random location in memory when you declare it. It could be pointing into the system stack, or the global variables, or into the program's code space, or into the operating system.
So, you must give them something to point to and in this case is a NULL. You can do it like this node* table[26] = {NULL};. Another point is when you type char buffer[5] = "Hello";. The char buffer[5] essentially is a pointer pointing to a memory address that the system saves so you can put your string. The memory is saved in blocks so when you type char buffer[1] for example you "jump" to the second part of the entire block which represents the string.
When you do char buffer[5] = "Hello"; " it's sounds like " you are trying to make the Hello string fit in the last piece of the block. To fix this just type char buffer[6] = {"Hello"};(Because you need n+1 of size, you have to include the \0 character). And it will fit properly. Now i think you can figure out how to do the rest.

Segmentation Fault while malloc and sizeof

Sorry if I'm offending anyone but I started learning C this week and I got a segmentation fault while compiling this. Can I please have a second pair of eyes to help me with this error?
void Space(void *empty, size_p s)
{
empty = malloc(s);
}
int main()
{
int *p = NULL;
Space(p, sizeof(p));
*p = 7;
return;
}
empty is just a pointer variable - it contains "some" address, but it is still a local variable in the context of Space. If you want to update the value of int *p in Space, you'll need to pass a pointer to it:
int main()
{
int *p = NULL;
Space(&p, sizeof *p);
*p = 7;
return;
}
void Space(void **empty, size_p s)
{
*empty = malloc(s);
}
Also, you have a bug where you call Space: Space(p, sizeof(p));
sizeof(p) is the size of the int * variable but you want to allocate the size of an int as that's what you're storing in p. So that line should instead be:
Space(&p, sizeof *p);
void * Space(void *empty, size_t s)
{
empty = malloc(s);
return empty;
}
int main()
{
int *p = NULL;
p = Space(p, sizeof(int));
*p = 7;
return 0;
}
You can change the Space function to return a void * or an int *. The variable empty is a copy of the pointer in main. When you change the value in Space, because it is a copy, the change never makes it back to main.
I changed sizeof(p) to sizeof(int). This is more of personal preference but I try to only give types as the argument to sizeof. You can get surprising results when you apply sizeof to variables.
I really like #DIMMSum's answer but I know pointer-to-a-pointer can be confusing especially when starting out.

garbage characters while inserting string to a linked list in c

So, what Im trying to achieve with this, is to create a linked list with three strings as data. The output shows the expected strings, but adds some garbage symbols, f.ex.: expected "string pierwszy", got : "string pierwszyn~rŚÝ".
I also tried to print out the strlen(tmp->word) and I got 3. I dont get it, i thought it would be 1. I dont get, why is it like this.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
typedef struct element element;
struct element{
char * word;
element * next;
};
element * head = NULL;
void addWord(char * new_word){
printf("new_word: %s\n\n\n", new_word);
element *tmp = NULL;
tmp = malloc(sizeof(element));
element *current = head;
tmp->word = malloc(sizeof(char) * strlen(new_word)+1);
strncpy(tmp->word, new_word, strlen(new_word));
tmp->word[strlen(new_word)] = "\0";
tmp->next = current;
head = tmp;
}
void free_list(element * node){
if(node != NULL){
free_list(node->next);
free(node->word);
free(node);
}
}
void print_list(element * node){
element * tmp = node;
while(tmp != NULL){
printf("word: %s\n", tmp->word);
tmp = tmp->next;
}
}
int main()
{
char * name1 = "string pierwszy";
char * name2 = "drugi";
char * name3 = "333trzeci";
addWord(name1);
addWord(name2);
addWord(name3);
print_list(head);
free_list(head);
return 0;
}
The problem is the following line:
tmp->word[strlen(new_word)] = "\0";
There is a difference between "\0" and '\0'. '\0' is correct in this situation, since it's simply a null character. "\0" is a string containing a null character, so it's exactly the same thing as
{'\0', '\0'} (one null character for the one you entered and one which is added automatically).
Since arrays in C are treated as pointers for some purposes, the code that you wrote creates an array of two null characters in the memory, takes the address of the first element, converts it to a char using the ASCII table and stores it in the string. So what you did is basically equivalent to doing this:
char someString[2];
someString[0] = '\0';
someString[1] = '\0';
tmp->word[strlen(new_word)] = (char)&(someString[0]);
Since the string doesn't have any terminated null character because of this, it doesn't know where the string ends so it continues a couple of characters giving you the characters that just happened to be in the memory.
So the first "garbage" character as you say is the ASCII equivalent of the address of some string, and the other ones are what happened to be in the memory right there and right then.
The correct code is of course the following:
tmp->word[strlen(new_word)] = '\0';

Beginner C Pointer Problem

I am a new C user have problems with pointers.
The function add_word(*word_to_add) should take a c string and add it to the appropriate word_node linked list. However, subsequent additions seem to be overwriting the word element of all nodes in the hash table. I think this is happening because I am setting each nodes word element to be a pointer to word_to_add rather than copying the value of word_to_add.
#define HASH_TABLE_SIZE 10
static char **word_list;
struct word_node {
char* word;
struct word_node *next;
};
static struct word_node *word_hash_table[HASH_TABLE_SIZE];
static int hash(char *word) {
int ascii_char;
int key;
key = 0;
while (*word != '\0') {
ascii_char = tolower(*word);
key += ascii_char;
word++;
}
key %= HASH_TABLE_SIZE;
return key;
}
void ws_add_word(char *word_to_add)
{
int word_position;
word_position = hash(word_to_add);
if (word_hash_table[word_position] == NULL)
{
struct word_node* p;
p = malloc(sizeof(struct word_node));;
p->word = word_to_add;
p->next = NULL;
word_hash_table[word_position] = p;
++num_words;
} else {
struct word_node* p;
p = word_hash_table[word_position];
while (p->next != NULL)
{
p = p->next;
}
struct word_node* q;
q = malloc(sizeof(struct word_node));
q->word = word_to_add;
q->next = NULL;
p->next = q;
++num_words;
}
I think your code is ok as is. If you are having problems, it may be in how you are calling the function. For example, here is a quick & dirty sample:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int num_words;
/* paste sample code here */
#define HASH_TABLE_SIZE 10
// rest of code
void ws_add_word(char *word_to_add)
{
// function code
}
/* end of sample code */
int main (void)
{
char a[] = "Hello";
char b[] = "Helkp"; // chosen to have the same hash result
ws_add_word((char *)&a);
ws_add_word((char *)&b);
}
I compiled with gcc -g and ran through gdb. Doing so and stepping through ws_add_word and examining the contents of word_hash_table seems to do what you want. If it still doesn't work, you should give an example of how you are calling ws_add_word.
Also, if you simply change p->word = word_to_add with strcpy(p->word,word_to_add), you will probably get a seg fault because p->word has not been set to anything meaningful yet. You need to p->word = (char *)malloc(N) where N is big enough, and then strcpy, if that's what you really want to do. Whether you want to or not depends on whether the memory location pointed to by char *word_to_add will be valid the next time you need to use it.
You cannot just equate two strings or character pointers like:
char* p1, p2;
p1=p2; // THIS IS INVALID
In your code you have done this mistake two times:--
p->word = word_to_add;
and
q->word = word_to_add;
This says that you are making p->word point to word_to_add which is a pointer.It will just start referring to the same object but not copy the string which you expect.
It won't copy the contents of word_to_add to q->word, which you are assuming to be done.
You need to copy the strings using any string copy function like: strcpy, strncpy or memcpy.
replace p->word = word_to_add with
strcpy(p->word,word_to_add);
and similarly
replace q->word = word_to_add with
strcpy(q->word,word_to_add);
--
Kr. Alok
Looks good to me, except for line 10 in ws_add_word.
Change
q->word = word_to_add;
to
p->word = word_to_add;
The node's char pointer 'word' seems to point to the original string rather than holding a copy of its own. This is fine as long as the original string doesn't change. For example:
//Assume word_to_add is "String 1"
p->word = word_to_add;
//Now change word_to_add to "String 2"
//After this p->word would be "String 2"
I don't know if that was the intended behavior. You might want to allocate memory for every 'word' pointer in the node structure and copy the word_to_add string.

Why use double indirection? or Why use pointers to pointers?

When should a double indirection be used in C? Can anyone explain with a example?
What I know is that a double indirection is a pointer to a pointer. Why would I need a pointer to a pointer?
If you want to have a list of characters (a word), you can use char *word
If you want a list of words (a sentence), you can use char **sentence
If you want a list of sentences (a monologue), you can use char ***monologue
If you want a list of monologues (a biography), you can use char ****biography
If you want a list of biographies (a bio-library), you can use char *****biolibrary
If you want a list of bio-libraries (a ??lol), you can use char ******lol
... ...
yes, I know these might not be the best data structures
Usage example with a very very very boring lol
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int wordsinsentence(char **x) {
int w = 0;
while (*x) {
w += 1;
x++;
}
return w;
}
int wordsinmono(char ***x) {
int w = 0;
while (*x) {
w += wordsinsentence(*x);
x++;
}
return w;
}
int wordsinbio(char ****x) {
int w = 0;
while (*x) {
w += wordsinmono(*x);
x++;
}
return w;
}
int wordsinlib(char *****x) {
int w = 0;
while (*x) {
w += wordsinbio(*x);
x++;
}
return w;
}
int wordsinlol(char ******x) {
int w = 0;
while (*x) {
w += wordsinlib(*x);
x++;
}
return w;
}
int main(void) {
char *word;
char **sentence;
char ***monologue;
char ****biography;
char *****biolibrary;
char ******lol;
//fill data structure
word = malloc(4 * sizeof *word); // assume it worked
strcpy(word, "foo");
sentence = malloc(4 * sizeof *sentence); // assume it worked
sentence[0] = word;
sentence[1] = word;
sentence[2] = word;
sentence[3] = NULL;
monologue = malloc(4 * sizeof *monologue); // assume it worked
monologue[0] = sentence;
monologue[1] = sentence;
monologue[2] = sentence;
monologue[3] = NULL;
biography = malloc(4 * sizeof *biography); // assume it worked
biography[0] = monologue;
biography[1] = monologue;
biography[2] = monologue;
biography[3] = NULL;
biolibrary = malloc(4 * sizeof *biolibrary); // assume it worked
biolibrary[0] = biography;
biolibrary[1] = biography;
biolibrary[2] = biography;
biolibrary[3] = NULL;
lol = malloc(4 * sizeof *lol); // assume it worked
lol[0] = biolibrary;
lol[1] = biolibrary;
lol[2] = biolibrary;
lol[3] = NULL;
printf("total words in my lol: %d\n", wordsinlol(lol));
free(lol);
free(biolibrary);
free(biography);
free(monologue);
free(sentence);
free(word);
}
Output:
total words in my lol: 243
One reason is you want to change the value of the pointer passed to a function as the function argument, to do this you require pointer to a pointer.
In simple words, Use ** when you want to preserve (OR retain change in) the Memory-Allocation or Assignment even outside of a function call. (So, Pass such function with double pointer arg.)
This may not be a very good example, but will show you the basic use:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void allocate(int **p)
{
*p = (int *)malloc(sizeof(int));
}
int main()
{
int *p = NULL;
allocate(&p);
*p = 42;
printf("%d\n", *p);
free(p);
}
Let’s say you have a pointer. Its value is an address.
but now you want to change that address.
you could. by doing pointer1 = pointer2, you give pointer1 the address of pointer2.
but! if you do that within a function, and you want the result to persist after the function is done, you need do some extra work. you need a new pointer3 just to point to pointer1. pass pointer3 to the function.
here is an example. look at the output below first, to understand.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int c = 1;
int d = 2;
int e = 3;
int * a = &c;
int * b = &d;
int * f = &e;
int ** pp = &a; // pointer to pointer 'a'
printf("\n a's value: %x \n", a);
printf("\n b's value: %x \n", b);
printf("\n f's value: %x \n", f);
printf("\n can we change a?, lets see \n");
printf("\n a = b \n");
a = b;
printf("\n a's value is now: %x, same as 'b'... it seems we can, but can we do it in a function? lets see... \n", a);
printf("\n cant_change(a, f); \n");
cant_change(a, f);
printf("\n a's value is now: %x, Doh! same as 'b'... that function tricked us. \n", a);
printf("\n NOW! lets see if a pointer to a pointer solution can help us... remember that 'pp' point to 'a' \n");
printf("\n change(pp, f); \n");
change(pp, f);
printf("\n a's value is now: %x, YEAH! same as 'f'... that function ROCKS!!!. \n", a);
return 0;
}
void cant_change(int * x, int * z){
x = z;
printf("\n ----> value of 'a' is: %x inside function, same as 'f', BUT will it be the same outside of this function? lets see\n", x);
}
void change(int ** x, int * z){
*x = z;
printf("\n ----> value of 'a' is: %x inside function, same as 'f', BUT will it be the same outside of this function? lets see\n", *x);
}
Here is the output: (read this first)
a's value: bf94c204
b's value: bf94c208
f's value: bf94c20c
can we change a?, lets see
a = b
a's value is now: bf94c208, same as 'b'... it seems we can, but can we do it in a function? lets see...
cant_change(a, f);
----> value of 'a' is: bf94c20c inside function, same as 'f', BUT will it be the same outside of this function? lets see
a's value is now: bf94c208, Doh! same as 'b'... that function tricked us.
NOW! lets see if a pointer to a pointer solution can help us... remember that 'pp' point to 'a'
change(pp, f);
----> value of 'a' is: bf94c20c inside function, same as 'f', BUT will it be the same outside of this function? lets see
a's value is now: bf94c20c, YEAH! same as 'f'... that function ROCKS!!!.
Adding to Asha's response, if you use single pointer to the example bellow (e.g. alloc1() ) you will lose the reference to the memory allocated inside the function.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void alloc2(int** p) {
*p = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int));
**p = 10;
}
void alloc1(int* p) {
p = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int));
*p = 10;
}
int main(){
int *p = NULL;
alloc1(p);
//printf("%d ",*p);//undefined
alloc2(&p);
printf("%d ",*p);//will print 10
free(p);
return 0;
}
The reason it occurs like this is that in alloc1 the pointer is passed in by value. So, when it is reassigned to the result of the malloc call inside of alloc1, the change does not pertain to code in a different scope.
I saw a very good example today, from this blog post, as I summarize below.
Imagine you have a structure for nodes in a linked list, which probably is
typedef struct node
{
struct node * next;
....
} node;
Now you want to implement a remove_if function, which accepts a removal criterion rm as one of the arguments and traverses the linked list: if an entry satisfies the criterion (something like rm(entry)==true), its node will be removed from the list. In the end, remove_if returns the head (which may be different from the original head) of the linked list.
You may write
for (node * prev = NULL, * curr = head; curr != NULL; )
{
node * const next = curr->next;
if (rm(curr))
{
if (prev) // the node to be removed is not the head
prev->next = next;
else // remove the head
head = next;
free(curr);
}
else
prev = curr;
curr = next;
}
as your for loop. The message is, without double pointers, you have to maintain a prev variable to re-organize the pointers, and handle the two different cases.
But with double pointers, you can actually write
// now head is a double pointer
for (node** curr = head; *curr; )
{
node * entry = *curr;
if (rm(entry))
{
*curr = entry->next;
free(entry);
}
else
curr = &entry->next;
}
You don't need a prev now because you can directly modify what prev->next pointed to.
To make things clearer, let's follow the code a little bit. During the removal:
if entry == *head: it will be *head (==*curr) = *head->next -- head now points to the pointer of the new heading node. You do this by directly changing head's content to a new pointer.
if entry != *head: similarly, *curr is what prev->next pointed to, and now points to entry->next.
No matter in which case, you can re-organize the pointers in a unified way with double pointers.
1. Basic Concept -
When you declare as follows : -
1. char *ch - (called character pointer)
- ch contains the address of a single character.
- (*ch) will dereference to the value of the character..
2. char **ch -
'ch' contains the address of an Array of character pointers. (as in 1)
'*ch' contains the address of a single character. (Note that it's different from 1, due to difference in declaration).
(**ch) will dereference to the exact value of the character..
Adding more pointers expand the dimension of a datatype, from character to string, to array of strings, and so on... You can relate it to a 1d, 2d, 3d matrix..
So, the usage of pointer depends upon how you declare it.
Here is a simple code..
int main()
{
char **p;
p = (char **)malloc(100);
p[0] = (char *)"Apple"; // or write *p, points to location of 'A'
p[1] = (char *)"Banana"; // or write *(p+1), points to location of 'B'
cout << *p << endl; //Prints the first pointer location until it finds '\0'
cout << **p << endl; //Prints the exact character which is being pointed
*p++; //Increments for the next string
cout << *p;
}
2. Another Application of Double Pointers -
(this would also cover pass by reference)
Suppose you want to update a character from a function. If you try the following : -
void func(char ch)
{
ch = 'B';
}
int main()
{
char ptr;
ptr = 'A';
printf("%c", ptr);
func(ptr);
printf("%c\n", ptr);
}
The output will be AA. This doesn't work, as you have "Passed By Value" to the function.
The correct way to do that would be -
void func( char *ptr) //Passed by Reference
{
*ptr = 'B';
}
int main()
{
char *ptr;
ptr = (char *)malloc(sizeof(char) * 1);
*ptr = 'A';
printf("%c\n", *ptr);
func(ptr);
printf("%c\n", *ptr);
}
Now extend this requirement for updating a string instead of character.
For this, you need to receive the parameter in the function as a double pointer.
void func(char **str)
{
strcpy(str, "Second");
}
int main()
{
char **str;
// printf("%d\n", sizeof(char));
*str = (char **)malloc(sizeof(char) * 10); //Can hold 10 character pointers
int i = 0;
for(i=0;i<10;i++)
{
str = (char *)malloc(sizeof(char) * 1); //Each pointer can point to a memory of 1 character.
}
strcpy(str, "First");
printf("%s\n", str);
func(str);
printf("%s\n", str);
}
In this example, method expects a double pointer as a parameter to update the value of a string.
Pointers to pointers also come in handy as "handles" to memory where you want to pass around a "handle" between functions to re-locatable memory. That basically means that the function can change the memory that is being pointed to by the pointer inside the handle variable, and every function or object that is using the handle will properly point to the newly relocated (or allocated) memory. Libraries like to-do this with "opaque" data-types, that is data-types were you don't have to worry about what they're doing with the memory being pointed do, you simply pass around the "handle" between the functions of the library to perform some operations on that memory ... the library functions can be allocating and de-allocating the memory under-the-hood without you having to explicitly worry about the process of memory management or where the handle is pointing.
For instance:
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef unsigned char** handle_type;
//some data_structure that the library functions would work with
typedef struct
{
int data_a;
int data_b;
int data_c;
} LIB_OBJECT;
handle_type lib_create_handle()
{
//initialize the handle with some memory that points to and array of 10 LIB_OBJECTs
handle_type handle = malloc(sizeof(handle_type));
*handle = malloc(sizeof(LIB_OBJECT) * 10);
return handle;
}
void lib_func_a(handle_type handle) { /*does something with array of LIB_OBJECTs*/ }
void lib_func_b(handle_type handle)
{
//does something that takes input LIB_OBJECTs and makes more of them, so has to
//reallocate memory for the new objects that will be created
//first re-allocate the memory somewhere else with more slots, but don't destroy the
//currently allocated slots
*handle = realloc(*handle, sizeof(LIB_OBJECT) * 20);
//...do some operation on the new memory and return
}
void lib_func_c(handle_type handle) { /*does something else to array of LIB_OBJECTs*/ }
void lib_free_handle(handle_type handle)
{
free(*handle);
free(handle);
}
int main()
{
//create a "handle" to some memory that the library functions can use
handle_type my_handle = lib_create_handle();
//do something with that memory
lib_func_a(my_handle);
//do something else with the handle that will make it point somewhere else
//but that's invisible to us from the standpoint of the calling the function and
//working with the handle
lib_func_b(my_handle);
//do something with new memory chunk, but you don't have to think about the fact
//that the memory has moved under the hood ... it's still pointed to by the "handle"
lib_func_c(my_handle);
//deallocate the handle
lib_free_handle(my_handle);
return 0;
}
Hope this helps,
Jason
Strings are a great example of uses of double pointers. The string itself is a pointer, so any time you need to point to a string, you'll need a double pointer.
Simple example that you probably have seen many times before
int main(int argc, char **argv)
In the second parameter you have it: pointer to pointer to char.
Note that the pointer notation (char* c) and the array notation (char c[]) are interchangeable in function arguments. So you could also write char *argv[]. In other words char *argv[] and char **argv are interchangeable.
What the above represents is in fact an array of character sequences (the command line arguments that are given to a program at startup).
See also this answer for more details about the above function signature.
A little late to the party, but hopefully this will help someone.
In C arrays always allocate memory on the stack, thus a function can't return
a (non-static) array due to the fact that memory allocated on the stack
gets freed automatically when the execution reaches the end of the current block.
That's really annoying when you want to deal with two-dimensional arrays
(i.e. matrices) and implement a few functions that can alter and return matrices.
To achieve this, you could use a pointer-to-pointer to implement a matrix with
dynamically allocated memory:
/* Initializes a matrix */
double** init_matrix(int num_rows, int num_cols){
// Allocate memory for num_rows float-pointers
double** A = calloc(num_rows, sizeof(double*));
// return NULL if the memory couldn't allocated
if(A == NULL) return NULL;
// For each double-pointer (row) allocate memory for num_cols floats
for(int i = 0; i < num_rows; i++){
A[i] = calloc(num_cols, sizeof(double));
// return NULL if the memory couldn't allocated
// and free the already allocated memory
if(A[i] == NULL){
for(int j = 0; j < i; j++){
free(A[j]);
}
free(A);
return NULL;
}
}
return A;
}
Here's an illustration:
double** double* double
------------- ---------------------------------------------------------
A ------> | A[0] | ----> | A[0][0] | A[0][1] | A[0][2] | ........ | A[0][cols-1] |
| --------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
| A[1] | ----> | A[1][0] | A[1][1] | A[1][2] | ........ | A[1][cols-1] |
| --------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
| . | .
| . | .
| . | .
| --------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
| A[i] | ----> | A[i][0] | A[i][1] | A[i][2] | ........ | A[i][cols-1] |
| --------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
| . | .
| . | .
| . | .
| --------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
| A[rows-1] | ----> | A[rows-1][0] | A[rows-1][1] | ... | A[rows-1][cols-1] |
------------- ---------------------------------------------------------
The double-pointer-to-double-pointer A points to the first element A[0] of a
memory block whose elements are double-pointers itself. You can imagine these
double-pointers as the rows of the matrix. That's the reason why every
double-pointer allocates memory for num_cols elements of type double.
Furthermore A[i] points to the i-th row, i.e. A[i] points to A[i][0] and
that's just the first double-element of the memory block for the i-th row.
Finally, you can access the element in the i-th row
and j-th column easily with A[i][j].
Here's a complete example that demonstrates the usage:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
/* Initializes a matrix */
double** init_matrix(int num_rows, int num_cols){
// Allocate memory for num_rows double-pointers
double** matrix = calloc(num_rows, sizeof(double*));
// return NULL if the memory couldn't allocated
if(matrix == NULL) return NULL;
// For each double-pointer (row) allocate memory for num_cols
// doubles
for(int i = 0; i < num_rows; i++){
matrix[i] = calloc(num_cols, sizeof(double));
// return NULL if the memory couldn't allocated
// and free the already allocated memory
if(matrix[i] == NULL){
for(int j = 0; j < i; j++){
free(matrix[j]);
}
free(matrix);
return NULL;
}
}
return matrix;
}
/* Fills the matrix with random double-numbers between -1 and 1 */
void randn_fill_matrix(double** matrix, int rows, int cols){
for (int i = 0; i < rows; ++i){
for (int j = 0; j < cols; ++j){
matrix[i][j] = (double) rand()/RAND_MAX*2.0-1.0;
}
}
}
/* Frees the memory allocated by the matrix */
void free_matrix(double** matrix, int rows, int cols){
for(int i = 0; i < rows; i++){
free(matrix[i]);
}
free(matrix);
}
/* Outputs the matrix to the console */
void print_matrix(double** matrix, int rows, int cols){
for(int i = 0; i < rows; i++){
for(int j = 0; j < cols; j++){
printf(" %- f ", matrix[i][j]);
}
printf("\n");
}
}
int main(){
srand(time(NULL));
int m = 3, n = 3;
double** A = init_matrix(m, n);
randn_fill_matrix(A, m, n);
print_matrix(A, m, n);
free_matrix(A, m, n);
return 0;
}
For example, you might want to make sure that when you free the memory of something you set the pointer to null afterwards.
void safeFree(void** memory) {
if (*memory) {
free(*memory);
*memory = NULL;
}
}
When you call this function you'd call it with the address of a pointer
void* myMemory = someCrazyFunctionThatAllocatesMemory();
safeFree(&myMemory);
Now myMemory is set to NULL and any attempt to reuse it will be very obviously wrong.
For instance if you want random access to noncontiguous data.
p -> [p0, p1, p2, ...]
p0 -> data1
p1 -> data2
-- in C
T ** p = (T **) malloc(sizeof(T*) * n);
p[0] = (T*) malloc(sizeof(T));
p[1] = (T*) malloc(sizeof(T));
You store a pointer p that points to an array of pointers. Each pointer points to a piece of data.
If sizeof(T) is big it may not be possible to allocate a contiguous block (ie using malloc) of sizeof(T) * n bytes.
One thing I use them for constantly is when I have an array of objects and I need to perform lookups (binary search) on them by different fields.
I keep the original array...
int num_objects;
OBJECT *original_array = malloc(sizeof(OBJECT)*num_objects);
Then make an array of sorted pointers to the objects.
int compare_object_by_name( const void *v1, const void *v2 ) {
OBJECT *o1 = *(OBJECT **)v1;
OBJECT *o2 = *(OBJECT **)v2;
return (strcmp(o1->name, o2->name);
}
OBJECT **object_ptrs_by_name = malloc(sizeof(OBJECT *)*num_objects);
int i = 0;
for( ; i<num_objects; i++)
object_ptrs_by_name[i] = original_array+i;
qsort(object_ptrs_by_name, num_objects, sizeof(OBJECT *), compare_object_by_name);
You can make as many sorted pointer arrays as you need, then use a binary search on the sorted pointer array to access the object you need by the data you have. The original array of objects can stay unsorted, but each pointer array will be sorted by their specified field.
Why double pointers?
The objective is to change what studentA points to, using a function.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct Person{
char * name;
} Person;
/**
* we need a ponter to a pointer, example: &studentA
*/
void change(Person ** x, Person * y){
*x = y; // since x is a pointer to a pointer, we access its value: a pointer to a Person struct.
}
void dontChange(Person * x, Person * y){
x = y;
}
int main()
{
Person * studentA = (Person *)malloc(sizeof(Person));
studentA->name = "brian";
Person * studentB = (Person *)malloc(sizeof(Person));
studentB->name = "erich";
/**
* we could have done the job as simple as this!
* but we need more work if we want to use a function to do the job!
*/
// studentA = studentB;
printf("1. studentA = %s (not changed)\n", studentA->name);
dontChange(studentA, studentB);
printf("2. studentA = %s (not changed)\n", studentA->name);
change(&studentA, studentB);
printf("3. studentA = %s (changed!)\n", studentA->name);
return 0;
}
/**
* OUTPUT:
* 1. studentA = brian (not changed)
* 2. studentA = brian (not changed)
* 3. studentA = erich (changed!)
*/
The following is a very simple C++ example that shows that if you want to use a function to set a pointer to point to an object, you need a pointer to a pointer. Otherwise, the pointer will keep reverting to null.
(A C++ answer, but I believe it's the same in C.)
(Also, for reference: Google("pass by value c++") = "By default, arguments in C++ are passed by value. When an argument is passed by value, the argument's value is copied into the function's parameter.")
So we want to set the pointer b equal to the string a.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
void Function_1(std::string* a, std::string* b) {
b = a;
std::cout << (b == nullptr); // False
}
void Function_2(std::string* a, std::string** b) {
*b = a;
std::cout << (b == nullptr); // False
}
int main() {
std::string a("Hello!");
std::string* b(nullptr);
std::cout << (b == nullptr); // True
Function_1(&a, b);
std::cout << (b == nullptr); // True
Function_2(&a, &b);
std::cout << (b == nullptr); // False
}
// Output: 10100
What happens at the line Function_1(&a, b);?
The "value" of &main::a (an address) is copied into the parameter std::string* Function_1::a. Therefore Function_1::a is a pointer to (i.e. the memory address of) the string main::a.
The "value" of main::b (an address in memory) is copied into the parameter std::string* Function_1::b. Therefore there are now 2 of these addresses in memory, both null pointers. At the line b = a;, the local variable Function_1::b is then changed to equal Function_1::a (= &main::a), but the variable main::b is unchanged. After the call to Function_1, main::b is still a null pointer.
What happens at the line Function_2(&a, &b);?
The treatment of the a variable is the same: within the function, Function_2::a is the address of the string main::a.
But the variable b is now being passed as a pointer to a pointer. The "value" of &main::b (the address of the pointer main::b) is copied into std::string** Function_2::b. Therefore within Function_2, dereferencing this as *Function_2::b will access and modify main::b . So the line *b = a; is actually setting main::b (an address) equal to Function_2::a (= address of main::a) which is what we want.
If you want to use a function to modify a thing, be it an object or an address (pointer), you have to pass in a pointer to that thing. The thing that you actually pass in cannot be modified (in the calling scope) because a local copy is made.
(An exception is if the parameter is a reference, such as std::string& a. But usually these are const. Generally, if you call f(x), if x is an object you should be able to assume that f won't modify x. But if x is a pointer, then you should assume that f might modify the object pointed to by x.)
Compare modifying value of variable versus modifying value of pointer:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void changeA(int (*a))
{
(*a) = 10;
}
void changeP(int *(*P))
{
(*P) = malloc(sizeof((*P)));
}
int main(void)
{
int A = 0;
printf("orig. A = %d\n", A);
changeA(&A);
printf("modi. A = %d\n", A);
/*************************/
int *P = NULL;
printf("orig. P = %p\n", P);
changeP(&P);
printf("modi. P = %p\n", P);
free(P);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
This helped me to avoid returning value of pointer when the pointer was modified by the called function (used in singly linked list).
OLD (bad):
int *func(int *P)
{
...
return P;
}
int main(void)
{
int *pointer;
pointer = func(pointer);
...
}
NEW (better):
void func(int **pointer)
{
...
}
int main(void)
{
int *pointer;
func(&pointer);
...
}
Most of the answers here are more or less related to application programming. Here is an example from embedded systems programming. For example below is an excerpt from the reference manual of NXP's Kinetis KL13 series microcontroller, this code snippet is used to run bootloader, which resides in ROM, from firmware:
"
To get the address of the entry point, the user application reads the word containing the pointer to the bootloader API tree at offset 0x1C of the bootloader's vector table. The vector table is placed at the base of the bootloader's address range, which for the ROM is 0x1C00_0000. Thus, the API tree pointer is at address 0x1C00_001C.
The bootloader API tree is a structure that contains pointers to other structures, which have the function and data addresses for the bootloader. The bootloader entry point is always the first word of the API tree.
"
uint32_t runBootloaderAddress;
void (*runBootloader)(void * arg);
// Read the function address from the ROM API tree.
runBootloaderAddress = **(uint32_t **)(0x1c00001c);
runBootloader = (void (*)(void * arg))runBootloaderAddress;
// Start the bootloader.
runBootloader(NULL);
I have used double pointers today while I was programming something for work, so I can answer why we had to use them (it's the first time I actually had to use double pointers). We had to deal with real time encoding of frames contained in buffers which are members of some structures. In the encoder we had to use a pointer to one of those structures. The problem was that our pointer was being changed to point to other structures from another thread. In order to use the current structure in the encoder, I had to use a double pointer, in order to point to the pointer that was being modified in another thread. It wasn't obvious at first, at least for us, that we had to take this approach. A lot of address were printed in the process :)).
You SHOULD use double pointers when you work on pointers that are changed in other places of your application. You might also find double pointers to be a must when you deal with hardware that returns and address to you.

Resources