How to undo changes to an array after passing to a function - c

Is there any way to undo the actions or get the original array after I changed the array as shown below.
#include <stdio.h>
void function(int array[]){
array[2] = 20;
//do some extra work
return;
}
int main(void){
int array[5] = {1,2,3,4,5};
function(array);
// code which has to use original array
return 0;
}

You can pack two 32 bit integers (old / new) into a 64 bit integer, example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdint.h>
void function(int64_t array[])
{
array[2] = (array[2] << 32) | 20;
}
void printarr(int64_t array[], size_t n)
{
size_t i;
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
printf("%d ", (int32_t)(array[i]));
}
printf("\n");
}
int main(void)
{
int64_t array[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
size_t i, n = sizeof(array) / sizeof(array[0]);
function(array);
puts("After function:");
printarr(array, n);
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
if (array[i] >> 32 != 0) /* Changed */
array[i] = array[i] >> 32; /* Undo */
}
puts("Original values:");
printarr(array, n);
return 0;
}
Output:
After function:
1 2 20 4 5
Original values:
1 2 3 4 5
Note:
Of course you can pack two 16 bit integers in a 32 bit integer if you are using short values in order to save some space.
To be portable use PRId32 format (defined in <inttyes.h>) for printf and int32_t:
printf("%"PRId32" ", (int32_t)x);
Another method:
If those changes are made sequentially over positive integers you can change the sign (to identify a change) and store only the changes using realloc:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
int *value;
size_t length;
} t_undo;
void function(t_undo *undo, int array[], int index, int value)
{
undo->value = realloc(undo->value, sizeof(int) * (undo->length + 1));
/* check realloc */
undo->value[undo->length++] = array[index];
array[index] = -value;
}
void printarr(int array[], size_t n)
{
size_t i;
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
printf("%d ", abs(array[i]));
}
printf("\n");
}
int main(void)
{
t_undo *undo;
int array[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
size_t i, j = 0, n = sizeof(array) / sizeof(array[0]);
undo = malloc(sizeof(*undo));
/* check malloc */
undo->value = NULL;
undo->length = 0;
function(undo, array, 2, 20);
puts("After function:");
printarr(array, n);
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
if (array[i] < 0) /* Changed */
array[i] = undo->value[j++]; /* Undo */
}
puts("Original values:");
printarr(array, n);
free(undo->value);
free(undo);
return 0;
}

Making it short: No. You cannot have your operations reverted - Not in a simple way anyway. What you probably want is to have a local copy of your data in your function(). You could do this by creating a new array and copy it to your first one:
int array[5] = whatever;
int array_copy[5];
memcpy(array_copy, array, 5*sizeof(int));
function(array_copy);
//You have your array now unchanged
If you really don't wanna do that, there's another way of enclosing your array into a struct and let the compiler synthesize a copy operation for you. However there's a serious downside for this one since for big such struct you may end up wasting your stack.
struct MyArray {
int array[5];
};
void function(struct MyArray m) {
//This will create a local copy of m
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
m.array[i] = i + 1;
}
}
void initialize(struct MyArray* m) {
int i;
assert(m != NULL);
for (i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
m->array[i] = i;
}
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
struct MyArray m;
int i;
initialize(&m);
function(m);
//Your m here will be untouched
return 0;
}

#include <stdio.h>
void function(int array[]){
array[2] = 20;
}
void save(const char *filename, const void *data, size_t size);
void undo(const char *filename);
int main(void){
int array[5] = {1,2,3,4,5};
save("save_2", &array[2], sizeof(int));//array[2] save to file
function(array);
undo("save_2");//restore
save("save_all", array, sizeof(array));
function(array);
undo("save_all");
// code which has to use original array
for(int i=0;i<5;++i)
printf("%d\n", array[i]);
remove("save_2");
remove("save_all");
return 0;
}
void save(const char *filename, const void *data, size_t size){
FILE *fp = fopen(filename, "wb");
fwrite(&data, sizeof(void *), 1, fp);
fwrite(&size, sizeof(size_t), 1, fp);
fwrite(data, size, 1, fp);
fclose(fp);、
}
void undo(const char *filename){
FILE *fp = fopen(filename, "rb");
void *data;
size_t size;
fread(&data, sizeof(void*), 1, fp);
fread(&size, sizeof(size_t), 1, fp);
fread(data, size, 1, fp);
fclose(fp);
}

Related

Split array into dynamic array and return ptr

I have a problem. I have to divide array into dynamic array and return pointer with parameter.
When I try to run this code, I get (interrupted by signal 11: SIGSEGV) this message. I think it is something with my pointers. But I don't even get any warnings, I don't know where to look else.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int splitData(int data[], int size, int splitPlace, int **firstArray);
int main() {
int data[6] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6};
int size = 6;
int *ptr = NULL;
int n = splitData(data, size, 3, &ptr);
printf("%d", n);
for(int i = 0; i < 3; ++i)
{
printf("[%d]", ptr[i]);
}
return 0;
}
int splitData(int data[], int size, int splitPlace, int **firstArray)
{
*firstArray = (int *)malloc(splitPlace * sizeof(int));
for(int i = 0; i < splitPlace; ++i)
{
*firstArray[i] = data[i];
}
return 0;
}
You have the precedence wrong with *firstArray[i]. You need (*firstArray)[i].
Clearer might be to allocate
int *new_array = malloc(...);
*firstArray = new_array.
Then use new_array in your loop body.

Sort an array in the relative order of elements of another array in c

I wish to sort a second array as per the first array. e.g.
first = {1,8,7,2,4}
second = {9,7,2,10,3}
I want first to be unchanged and second to be sorted in the same relative order as the first. i.e. the lowest value is at index 0, the second lowest value is at index 3, third lowest value is at index 4 etc etc
second = {2,10,9,3,7}
I have already tried some code for the following
#include <stdio.h>
typedef struct
{
int num;
int pos;
}ArrType;
ArrType arrA[5] = {{1,0},{8,1},{7,2},{2,3},{4,4}};
ArrType arrB[5] = {{9,0},{7,1},{2,2},{10,3},{3,4}};;
int cmparr(const void *a, const void *b)
{
ArrType *tmpa, *tmpb;
tmpa = (ArrType*) a;
tmpb = (ArrType*) b;
return(arrA[tmpa->pos].num - arrA[tmpb->pos].num);
}
int main(void)
{
int i;
qsort(arrB,5, sizeof(ArrType), cmparr);
for (i=0; i<5; i++)
{
printf ("%d ",arrB[i].num);
}
return (0);
}
The actual output is
9 10 3 2 7
I am open to a different data structure, but arrB should only be sorted one time.
I have seen some solutions for this in C++, Javascipt and other languages. But there is not a solution in C.
Edit - These arrays would be quite large in the final program. I am looking for a single sorting operation. i.e. single call to qsort
You need to create the meta-data that matches the desired ordering (i.e an array of indexes). Then apply that meta-data to the second array.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int first[] = {1,8,7,2,4};
int second[] = {9,7,2,10,3};
int compare(const void * a, const void * b);
int binary_search(int array[], int min, int max, int target);
void print_array(int * array, int c);
int main()
{
int idx;
int c = sizeof(first)/sizeof(int);
int * sorted = NULL;
int * indexes = NULL;
int * result = NULL;
if (NULL == (sorted = malloc(sizeof(first)))) {
return -1;
}
memcpy(sorted, first, sizeof(first));
if (NULL == (indexes = malloc(sizeof(first)))) {
free(sorted);
return -1;
}
memset(indexes, -1, sizeof(first));
if (NULL == (result = malloc(sizeof(second)))) {
free(sorted);
free(indexes);
return -1;
}
memset(result, -1, sizeof(second));
// 1st: Sort the reference array
qsort (sorted, c, sizeof(int), compare);
// 2nd: Record the position of each sorted element in the original array (this is your meta-data)
for (idx=0; idx<c; idx++) {
indexes[idx] = binary_search(sorted, 0, c, first[idx]);
}
// 3rd sort the target array
memcpy(sorted, second, sizeof(second));
qsort (sorted, c, sizeof(int), compare);
// 4th apply the stored positions to the sorted target array
for (idx = 0; idx < c; idx++) {
result[idx] = sorted[indexes[idx]];
}
print_array(result, c);
free(result);
free(indexes);
free(sorted);
return 0;
}
int compare(const void * a, const void * b)
{
return ( *(int*)a - *(int*)b );
}
int binary_search(int array[], int min, int max, int target)
{
int mid;
while (min <= max)
{
mid = min + (max - min)/2;
if (target > array[mid])
min = mid + 1;
else if (target < array[mid])
max = mid - 1;
else
return mid;
}
return -1;
}
void print_array(int * array, int c)
{
for(int i = 0; i < c; i++) {
printf("%d ", array[i]);
}
printf("\n");
}
Demo
Here is my approach, it uses qsort twice and arrC contains the result.
#include <stdio.h>
typedef struct
{
int num;
int pos;
}ArrType;
ArrType arrA[5] = {{1,0},{8,1},{7,2},{2,3},{4,4}};
int arrB[5] = {9,7,2,10,3};;
int arrC[5];
int cmpInt(const void *a, const void *b)
{
return(*a - *b);
}
int cmp(const void *a, const void *b)
{
ArrType *tmpa, *tmpb;
tmpa = (ArrType*) a;
tmpb = (ArrType*) b;
return(tmpa->num - tmpb->num);
}
int main(void)
{
int i;
qsort(arrA,5, sizeof(ArrType), cmp);
qsort(arrB,5, sizeof(ArrType), cmpInt);
for (i=0; i<5; i++)
{
arrC[arrA[i].pos] = arrB[i];
}
return (0);
}
Since C doesn't have a lambda compare (which could be used to sort an array of indexes according to first[]), the code below sorts an array of pointers ap[] to the elements of first[] using qsort(). Using pointers eliminates the need to pass an array name as a parameter for the compare function, which in turn allows the compare function to work with qsort(). The expression (ap[i]-first) converts a pointer into an index. Next second[] is sorted, also using qsort(). Then ap[] is used as a set of ranks to reorder second[] in place and in O(n) time.
To explain reorder by rank versus reorder by index:
dst[rank[i]] = src[i]; /* reorder by rank */
dst[i] = src[index[i]]; /* reorder by index */
Example code:
#include <memory.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
/* compare for ptr to integer */
int cmppi(const void *p0, const void *p1){
return (*(int *)p0 - *(int *)p1);
}
/* compare for ptr to ptr to integer */
int cmpppi(const void *p0, const void *p1){
return (**(int **)p0 - **(int **)p1);
}
int main()
{
int first[] = {1, 8, 7, 2, 4};
int second[] = {9, 7, 2,10, 3};
int **ap; /* array of pointers */
int *tmpp;
int tmpi;
size_t i, j;
/* allocate and generate array of pointers to first[] */
ap = (int **)malloc(sizeof(first)/sizeof(first[0])*sizeof(int *));
for(i = 0; i < sizeof(first)/sizeof(first[0]); i++)
ap[i] = &first[i];
/* sort ap */
qsort(ap, sizeof(first)/sizeof(first[0]), sizeof(int *), cmpppi);
/* sort second */
qsort(second, sizeof(second)/sizeof(second[0]), sizeof(int), cmppi);
/* reorder ap and second in place using ap as rank (O(n) time) */
for (i = 0; i < sizeof(second) / sizeof(second[0]); i++){
while(i != (j = ap[i] - first)){
tmpp = ap[i]; /* swap(ap[i], ap[j]) */
ap[i] = ap[j];
ap[j] = tmpp;
tmpi = second[i]; /* swap(second[i], second[j] */
second[i] = second[j];
second[j] = tmpi;
}
}
/* display second[] */
for (i = 0; i < sizeof(second) / sizeof(second[0]); i++)
printf("%3d", second[i]);
printf("\n");
free(ap);
return 0;
}

How do I assign values to a matrix inside a struct?

I have a header file with this type definition:
typedef struct {
int rows;
int columns;
int **values;
} bidimensional_matrix;
As an example, If I instantiate the matrix from a main function I'd just do:
int matrix[][] = {{1, 2, 3}, {1, 1, 1}, {5, 5, 5}};
How would you generate the same matrix but with the typedef provided previously? (I mean, with pointers and malloc)
Is the approach correct? Maybe I'm a little object oriented biased and in c it's not convenient to handle it that way. I've defined the struct that way so I can just pass two bidimensional_matrix by parameter and do a multiplication.
I propose you to use flexible member array, exemple:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
size_t n;
size_t m;
int matrix[];
} bidimensional_matrix;
bidimensional_matrix *new_bidimensional_matrix(size_t n, size_t m) {
bidimensional_matrix *bm = malloc(sizeof *bm + sizeof *bm->matrix * n * m);
if (!bm) {
return NULL;
}
*bm = (bidimensional_matrix){ .n = n, .m = m };
return bm;
}
int get_bidimensional_matrix(bidimensional_matrix *bm, size_t i, size_t j) {
return bm->matrix[i * bm->m + j];
}
int set_bidimensional_matrix(bidimensional_matrix *bm, size_t i, size_t j, int x) {
return bm->matrix[i * bm->m + j] = x;
}
int main(void) {
bidimensional_matrix *bm = new_bidimensional_matrix(5, 10);
if (!bm) {
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
for (size_t i = 0; i < bm->n * bm->m; i++) {
bm->matrix[i] = i;
}
printf("sample value %d\n", get_bidimensional_matrix(bm, 4, 5));
set_bidimensional_matrix(bm, 4, 5, 42);
printf("sample value %d\n", get_bidimensional_matrix(bm, 4, 5));
free(bm);
}
But you could use this too, that have other avantage but generally is more slow:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
size_t n;
size_t m;
int **matrix;
} bidimensional_matrix;
int main(void) {
bidimensional_matrix bm = { .n = 5, .m = 10, .matrix = malloc(sizeof *bm.matrix * bm.n) };
if (!bm.matrix) {
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
for (size_t i = 0; i < bm.n; i++) {
bm.matrix[i] = malloc(sizeof *bm.matrix[i] * bm.m);
if (!bm.matrix[i]) {
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
for (size_t j = 0; j < bm.m; j++) {
bm.matrix[i][j] = i * bm.m + j;
}
}
printf("sample value %d\n", bm.matrix[4][5]);
for (size_t i = 0; i < bm.n; i++) {
free(bm.matrix[i]);
}
free(bm.matrix);
}
If you need to swap rows the second could be a little faster cause swap row are O(1). But like you see the first one has only one malloc(), in practice with the cache of the processor it should be a lot more faster than the second implementation.

Double Pointer Using Error

I am having a trouble while practicing double pointer
The Error is "EXE_BAD_ACCESS" in Xcode
#include <stdio.h>
/* Program to Get Min and Max Value
in Array */
void SaveValue(int **maxPtr, int **minPtr, int arr[])
{
int i;
**maxPtr=arr[0]; // Error Line
**minPtr=arr[0]; // Error Line
for(i=1; i<5; i++)
{
if(arr[i]>**maxPtr)
**maxPtr=arr[i];
else if(arr[i]<**minPtr)
**minPtr=arr[i];
}
}
int main()
{
int arr[5]={4, 5, 7, 2, 6};
int *maxptr;
int *minptr;
SaveValue(&maxptr, &minptr, arr);
printf("%d, %d \n", *maxptr, *minptr);
}
I've thought that *dptr of **dptr = &ptr is *ptr
and **dptr means variable which *ptr pointing.
so I assume that **dptr = arr[0] means save first num of arr by reference at variable which *ptr pointing!
but I experiencing access error now.. I will thank for your help!
void SaveValue(int **maxPtr, int **minPtr, int arr[]); provides pointers to pointers to int so use them as such.
void SaveValue(int **maxPtr, int **minPtr, int arr[])
{
int i;
*maxPtr=arr + 0; /* same as *maxPtr = &arr[0]; */
*minPtr=arr + 0; /* same as *maxPtr = &arr[0]; */
for(i = 1; i < 5; i++)
{
if(arr[i] > **maxPtr)
*maxPtr = arr + i; /* same as *maxPtr = &arr[i]; */
else if(arr[i] < **minPtr)
*minPtr = arr + i; /* same as *minPtr = &arr[i]; */
}
}
Also this interface is a bit dangerous and unflexible; so why not pass the size of the array as well:
void SaveValue(int **maxPtr, int **minPtr, int arr[], ssize_t s)
{
*maxPtr=arr + 0;
*minPtr=arr + 0;
for(--s; s >= 0; --s)
{
if(arr[s] > **maxPtr)
{
*maxPtr = arr + s;
}
else if(arr[i] < **minPtr)
{
*minPtr = arr + s;
}
}
}
Call the fcuntion like this:
SaveValue(&maxptr, &minptr, arr, sizeof arr/sizeof *arr);
As the return value of the function is unused we could utlize it to apply some error inidication to allow the user of the function to write more stable code:
int SaveValue(int ** maxPtr, int ** minPtr, int arr[], ssize_t s)
{
int result = 0;
if ((NULL == arr) || (NULL == maxPtr) || (NULL == minPtr) || (0 > s))
{
result = -1;
errno = EINVAL;
}
else
{
*maxPtr=arr + 0;
*minPtr=arr + 0;
for(--s; s >= 0; --s)
{
if(arr[s] > **maxPtr)
{
*maxPtr = arr + s;
}
else if(arr[i] < **minPtr)
{
*minPtr = arr + s;
}
}
}
return result;
}
Use it like this:
#include <stdio.h>
int SaveValue(int ** maxPtr, int ** minPtr, int arr[], ssize_t s);
int main(void)
{
int arr[5]={4, 5, 7, 2, 6};
int *maxPtr;
int *minPtr;
int result = SaveValue(&maxPtr, &minPtr, arr, sizeof arr/sizeof *arr);
if (-1 == result)
{
perror("SaveValue() failed")
}
else
{
printf("%d, %d \n", *maxPtr, *minPtr);
}
}
The pointer should be pointing to valid memory location before dereferencing it else it will lead to undefined behavior. Below changes will fix your error.
int max;
int min;
int *maxptr = &max;
int *minptr = &min;
There is no need of double pointer here change your function prototype to
void SaveValue(int *maxPtr, int *minPtr, int arr[])
Have
int max;
int min;
in main() and call this API accordingly
SaveValue(&max,&min,arr);
I'll assume your code is purely for pointer learning purposes and not an attempt to implement this operation in a practical situation. So if you want to have maxptr and minptr in main() pointing to the maximum and minimum values in arr[], I think you should change your double pointer assignments from **maxPtr=arr[0] to *maxPtr=&arr[0], so your code would become:
void SaveValue(int **maxPtr, int **minPtr, int arr[])
{
int i;
*maxPtr = &arr[0]; // Error Line
*minPtr = &arr[0]; // Error Line
for (i = 1; i < 5; i++) {
if (arr[i] > **maxPtr)
*maxPtr = &arr[i];
else if (arr[i] < **minPtr)
*minPtr = &arr[i];
}
}
In this case, when you make the assignments, you don't want to dereference the double pointers. Instead, you should assign it with the address of the element you want to show when you dereference them in main().
You don't need to use the double asterisk when initialize the maxPtr and minPtr pointers in the function SaveValue, neither in the for loop body. MaxPtr and minPtr both are double pointers, but is still the memory direction of maxptr in main(). So you only need to dereference them with a single asterisk, to acces the memory direction them points to.
The source correct source code is this:
#include <stdio.h>
/* Correct program to Get Min and Max Value in Array */
void SaveValue(int **maxPtr, int **minPtr, int arr[])
{
int i;
*maxPtr=arr[0];
*minPtr=arr[0];
for(i=1; i<5; i++)
{
if(arr[i]>*maxPtr)
*maxPtr=arr[i];
else if(arr[i]<*minPtr)
*minPtr=arr[i];
}
}
int main(void)
{
int arr[5]={4, 5, 7, 2, 6};
int *maxptr;
int *minptr;
SaveValue(&maxptr, &minptr, arr);
printf("%d, %d \n", maxptr, minptr);
return 0;
}
When I compile it with GCC and execute it, i get the next output:
7, 2.
Remember that depending of the environment (Operating System, version, compiler, standards) that you use the program results may vary.

Bubble Sort Trouble

gcc compiles the following code without error. I'm creating a bubble sort function that can be used with arrays of any data type (hence the function pointer).
It sorts the array of character strings (arr2) without a problem, however, I can't figure out why it won't properly sort the array of integers (arr). I added a printf statement in the compare_long function to see what is going on. It doesn't look like the integers are being passed to it properly. Any help will be greatly appreciated.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUF 256
long arr[10] = { 3,6,1,2,3,8,4,1,7,2};
char arr2[5][20] = { "Mickey Mouse",
"Donald Duck",
"Minnie Mouse",
"Goofy",
"Pluto" };
void bubble(void *p, int width, int N, int(*fptr)(const void *, const void *));
int compare_string(const void *m, const void *n);
int compare_long(const void *m, const void *n);
int main(void) {
int i;
puts("\nBefore Sorting:\n");
for(i = 0; i < 10; i++) { /* show the long ints */
printf("%ld ",arr[i]);
}
puts("\n");
for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) { /* show the strings */
printf("%s\n", arr2[i]);
}
bubble(arr, 4, 10, compare_long); /* sort the longs */
bubble(arr2, 20, 5, compare_string); /* sort the strings */
puts("\n\nAfter Sorting:\n");
for(i = 0; i < 10; i++) { /* show the sorted longs */
printf("%d ",arr[i]);
}
puts("\n");
for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) { /* show the sorted strings */
printf("%s\n", arr2[i]);
}
return 0;
}
void bubble(void *p, int width, int N, int(*fptr)(const void *, const void *)) {
int i, j, k;
unsigned char buf[MAX_BUF];
unsigned char *bp = p;
for(i = N - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
for(j = 1; j <= i; j++) {
k = fptr((void *)(bp + width*(j-1)), (void *)(bp + j*width));
if(k > 0) {
memcpy(buf, bp + width*(j-1), width);
memcpy(bp + width*(j-1), bp + j*width , width);
memcpy(bp + j*width, buf, width);
}
}
}
}
int compare_string(const void *m, const void *n) {
char *m1 = (char *)m;
char *n1 = (char *)n;
return (strcmp(m1,n1));
}
int compare_long(const void *m, const void *n) {
long *m1, *n1;
m1 = (long *)m;
n1 = (long *)n;
printf("m1 = %l and n1 = %l\n", *m1, *n1);
return (*m1 > *n1);
}
The ANSI C spec defines long as a MINIMUM of 4 bytes (32 bits) but GCC is defining long as 8 bytes in your case. It is architecture-specific so you need to use sizeof(long) or one of the C99 types like uint32_t or int32_t if you want a specific size.

Resources