how to find complete sorting of elements by frequency? - c

Here is the problem:
Given an array of integers, sort the array according to frequency of elements. For example, if the input array is {2, 3, 2, 4, 5, 12, 2, 3, 3, 3, 12}, then modify the array to {3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 12, 12, 4, 5}. if 2 numbers have same frequency then print the one which came 1st.
I know how to do it partially. Here is my approcach.
I will create a struct which will be like:
typedef struct node
{
int index; // for storing the position of the number in the array.
int count; // for storing the number of times the number appears
int value; // for storing the actual value
} a[50];
I will create an array of these structs, I will then sort it by a sorting algorithm on the basis of their count. However, how can I ensure that if the frequency of two elements are same, then that number should appear which has a lesser index value?

#include <stdlib.h> // qsort, malloc, free
#include <stddef.h> // size_t
#include <stdio.h> // printf
struct number
{
const int * value;
int num_occurrences;
};
static void cmp_by_val(const struct number * a, const struct number * b)
{
if (*a->value < *b->value)
return -1;
else if (*b->value < *a->value)
return 1;
else
return 0;
}
static void cmp_by_occurrence_stable(const struct number * a, const struct number * b)
{
if (a->num_occurrences < b->num_occurrences)
return -1;
else if (b->num_occurrences < a->num_occurrences)
return 1;
else if (a->value < b->value)
return -1;
else if (b->value < a->value)
return 1;
else
return 0;
}
static struct number * sort_by_occurrence(const int * arr, size_t N)
{
//
// STEP 1: Convert the input
//
struct number * sort_arr = (struct number *)malloc(N * sizeof(struct number));
if (! sort_arr) return NULL;
for (int k = 0; k < N; ++k)
{
sort_arr[k].value = &arr[k];
sort_arr[k].num_occurrences = 0;
}
//
// STEP 2: Sort the input based on value
//
qsort(sort_arr, N, sizeof(struct number), cmp_by_val);
//
// STEP 3: Count occurrences
//
if (0 < N)
{
int cur_value = *sort_arr[0].value;
int i = 0;
for (j = 1; j < N; ++j)
{
if (*sort_arr[j].value != *sort_arr[i].value)
{
for (int k = i; k < j; ++k)
sort_arr[k].num_occurrences = j - i;
i = j;
}
}
for (; i < N; ++i)
sort_arr[i].num_occurrences = N - i;
}
//
// STEP 4: Sort based on occurrence count
//
qsort(sort_arr, N, sizeof(struct number), cmp_by_occurrence_stable);
//
// DONE
//
return sort_arr;
}
static void print_arr(const struct number * arr, size_t N)
{
if (0 < N)
{
printf("%d", arr[0]->value);
for (int k = 1; k < N; ++k)
printf(", %d", arr[k]->value);
}
printf("\n");
}
int main(int argc, char ** argv)
{
const int EXAMPLE_INPUT[11] = { 2, 3, 2, 4, 5, 12, 2, 3, 3, 3, 12 };
struct number * sort_arr = sort_by_occurrence(EXAMPLE_INPUT, 11);
if (sort_arr)
{
print_arr(sort_arr, 11);
free(sort_arr);
}
};

You could create an array which stores the frequency of your input array (i.e. frequency[i] is the frequency of the input[i] element). After that it is easy to order the frequency array (using an stable algorithm) and make the same changes (swaps?) to the input array.
For creating the frequency array you can use several approaches, a simple and inefficient one is just counting each element with two nested loops. I left more efficient alternatives to your imagination.
Note: the frequency array has the same function as the count field in your struct node, but in a separated memory. If you will not need the frequencies in the future, I recommend you to use the separated memory, as you can release it.

It seems that the problem is using unstable sort algorithm on the frequency of array elements.
Do a qsort on the array based on freq
Again do a qsort on the resulted array based on the indexes of the element with the same freq only.
This should give you a correct answer in O(nLog)
I minimized the code. The obvious parts are left out.
struct node
{
int *val;
int freq;
// int index; <- we can do this by comparing &a->val with &b->val
};
int compare_byfreq(const int* a, const int* b)
{
return a->freq - b->freq;
}
int compare_index(const int* a, const int* b)
{
if( a->freq == b->freq)
{
return a->val - b->val; //this can never be zero
}
//else we have different freq don't move elem
return 0;
}
int main()
{
int arr[] = {2, 3, 2, 4, 5, 12, 2, 3, 3, 3, 12};
node *narray = (struct node*)malloc(sizeof(arr) * sizeof(node));
// build the nodes-array
for(int i =0; i < sizeof(arr); i++)
{
/* buid narray here, make sure you store the pointer to val and not the actual values */
}
qsort(narray, sizeof(arr), compare_byfreq);
qsort(narray, sizeof(arr), compare_index);
/*print narray*/
return 0;
}
Edit: #0xbe5077ed got an interesting idea. Instead of comparing indexes compare addresses of your values! - I just re-edited the code for that

I was trying to learn Java nowadays, realized that this could be a good exercise. Tried and solved this problem over there in Eclipse. Java is horrible, I went back to C to solve it, here's a solution that I'll explain right after showing it:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <malloc.h>
typedef struct numbergroup {
int firstencounteridx;
int count;
int thenumber;
} Numbergroup;
int firstoneissuperior( Numbergroup gr1, Numbergroup gr2 ) {
return gr1.count > gr2.count || // don't mind the line-break, it's just to fit
( gr1.count == gr2.count && gr1.firstencounteridx < gr2.firstencounteridx );
}
void sortgroups( Numbergroup groups[], int amount ) {
for ( int i = 1; i < amount; i++ ) {
for ( int j = 0; j < amount - i; j++ ) {
if ( firstoneissuperior( groups[j + 1], groups[j] ) ) {
Numbergroup temp = groups[j + 1];
groups[j + 1] = groups[j];
groups[j] = temp;
}
}
}
}
int main( ) {
int input[] = { 2, 3, 2, 4, 5, 12, 2, 3, 3, 3, 12 };
Numbergroup * groups = NULL;
int amountofgroups = 0;
for ( int i = 0; i < ( sizeof input / sizeof * input ); i++ ) {
int uniqueencounter = 1;
for ( int j = 0; j < amountofgroups; j++ ) {
if ( groups[j].thenumber == input[i] ) {
uniqueencounter = 0;
groups[j].count++;
break;
}
}
if ( uniqueencounter ) {
groups = realloc( groups, ( amountofgroups + 1 ) * sizeof * groups );
groups[amountofgroups].firstencounteridx = i;
groups[amountofgroups].count = 1;
groups[amountofgroups].thenumber = input[i];
amountofgroups++;
}
}
sortgroups( groups, amountofgroups );
for ( int i = 0; i < amountofgroups; i++ )
for ( int j = 0; j < groups[i].count; j++ )
printf( "%d ", groups[i].thenumber );
free( groups );
putchar( 10 );
return 0;
}
Let me explain the structure first, as well as its functionality: It is for each unique number. In your example, it is for 2s, 3s, 4s, 5s and the 12s, one for each, 5 in total. Each one is to store:
the index of the first encounter of that number
the amount of encounter of that number
the value of that number
For example, for 12s, it shall store:
firstencounteridx as 5, that is the index of the first 12
count as 2
thenumber as 12
The first loop generally does that. It expands the group of Numbergroups whenever a unique number is encountered, stores its index as well; increases the count in case a number that already has a group has been encountered.
Then a sort is issued, which simply is a bubble sort. Might be different than the conventional one, I don't have any memorized.
Sorting criteria function simply checks if the count field of the first group is greater than the other; otherwise it checks whether they are the same and the firstencounter of the first group is earlier than the other; in which cases it returns 1 as true. Those are the only possible ways for the first group to be considered superior than the second one.
That's one method, there can be others. This is just a suggestion, I hope it helps you, not just for this case, but in general.

Created a map and sort the map by value.
O(nlogn) time, and O(n) space.
import java.util.*;
public class SortByFrequency {
static void sortByFreq( int[] A ) {
// 1. create map<number, its count>
Map<Integer, Integer> map = new HashMap<>();
for(int i = 0; i < A.length; i++) {
int key = A[i];
if( map.containsKey(key) ) {
Integer count = map.get(key);
count++;
map.put(key, count);
}
else {
map.put(key, 1);
}
}
// 2. sort map by value in desc. order
// used modified (for desc. order) MapUtil in http://stackoverflow.com/questions/109383/how-to-sort-a-mapkey-value-on-the-values-in-java
Map<Integer, Integer> map2= MapUtil.sortByValue(map);
for(Map.Entry<Integer, Integer> entry : map2.entrySet() ) {
int num = entry.getKey();
int count = entry.getValue();
for(int i = 0; i < count; i++ ) {
System.out.print( num + " ");
}
}
System.out.println();
}
public static void main(String[] args ) {
int[] A1 = {2, 3, 2, 4, 5, 12, 2, 3, 3, 3, 12};
sortByFreq(A1);
}
}

Related

Test task in C - my solution allegedly does not pass through some test cases

Currently I am trying to practise my c skills on some demo test tasks. I encountered following task and I implemented a solution, which does not pass the test. Can you review my solution and point out what corner cases have I missed alternatively how could I make the solution more efficient? Basically any input is appreciated!
Task:
Write a function:
int solution(int A[], int N);
that, given an array A of N integers, returns the smallest positive
integer (greater than 0) that does not occur in A. For example, given
A = [1, 3, 6, 4, 1, 2], the function should return 5. Given A = [1, 2,
3], the function should return 4. Given A = [−1, −3], the function
should return 1.
Write an efficient algorithm for the following assumptions: N is an
integer within the range [1..100,000]; each element of array A is an
integer within the range [−1,000,000..1,000,000].
My solution:
int solution(int A[], int N) {
int B[N];
unsigned int Bidx=0;
unsigned int i = 0;
int smallest = 1000000;
// ged rid of negative elements and find smallest positive element
for(i=0; i<N; i++)
{
if(A[i]>0)
{
B[Bidx]=A[i];
Bidx++;
if(A[i] < smallest)
smallest = A[i];
}
}
// if no positive elements found, solution is 1
if(Bidx == 0)
return 1;
// iterate through the positive values to find the smallest not present value
int condition = 1;
int candidate = smallest+1;
while(condition)
{
condition = 0;
for(i=0; i < Bidx; i++)
{
if(B[i] == candidate)
{
candidate++;
condition = 1;
}
}
}
return candidate;
}
As your integers are limited to 1e6 then a naive lookup table will be most efficient.
int solution(int A[], int N)
{
char num[1000*1000] = {0,};
while(N--)
{
if(*A > 0) num[*A - 1] = 1;
A++;
}
char *res = memchr(num, 0, 1000*1000);
return res ? 1 + res - num : -1;
}
Instead of char as an element of the array, you can use bits which will reduce the lookup table size 8 times.
Use an array of flags exists. For each positive number n in A, set exists[n] to 1. Then find the first 0 value in exists.
#define MAXNUM 1000000
int solution(int A[], unsigned N) {
int exists[MAXNUM + 1] = {0};
found_positive = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) {
if (A[i] > 0) {
found_positive = 1;
exists[i] = 1;
}
}
if (!found_positive) {
return 1;
}
for (int i = 1; i <= MAXNUM; i++) {
if (!exists[i]) {
return i;
}
}
return MAXNUM + 1;
}

Output the indices of array in descending order

I use the following quicksort function to sort any given array in descending order:
int sorting (const void * a, const void * b)
{
return ( *(double*)a < *(double*)b );
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int n;
double values[] = { 88.54, 56.65, 100.13, 2.091, 25.223 };
qsort(values, 5, sizeof(double), sorting);
for( n = 0 ; n < 5; n++ ) {
printf("%f ", values[n]);
}
return(0);
}
Besides outputting the values in descending order, I want to output their corresponding indices. For instance, for the given values[] array, I would get [2, 0, 1, 4, 3] which indicates the index 2 has the largest values, index 0 has the second largest values, and so on. How can I modify the code above ?
Thank you
Combine values with indexes in a struct, sort them, and print indexes along with values:
struct ind_val {
int index;
double value;
};
int sorting_ind_val (const void * a, const void * b) {
double lhs = ((struct ind_val*)a)->value;
double rhs = ((struct ind_val*)b)->value;
if (lhs < rhs)
return 1;
if (lhs > rhs)
return -1;
return 0;
}
...
double values[] = { 88.54, 56.65, 100.13, 2.091, 25.223 };
struct ind_val pair[5];
for (int i = 0 ; i != 5 ; i++) {
pair[i].index = i;
pair[i].value = values[i];
}
qsort(pair, 5, sizeof(struct ind_val), sorting_ind_val);
for (int i = 0 ; i != 5 ; i++) {
printf("%d: %f\n", pair[i].index, pair[i].value);
}
Demo.
2: 100.130000
0: 88.540000
1: 56.650000
4: 25.223000
3: 2.091000

How to find top 6 elements in an array in C

I am trying to find top 6 elements from an array with their ordering number.
int x=0;
for (int k = 0; k < 6; k++) //
{
for (i = 1; i <= 90; i++)
{
if (sorted[k] < holder[i] && i >= x)
{
sorted[k] = holder[i];
x = i; //
}
}
}
But this does not work. I want it to give me output like 43->7 15 ->3 etc..
Haven't written C in a while, but here is a simple solution that modifies the array in place and uses selection sort to select the k highest numbers in the array and moves them to the front. It keeps an array of indices that correspond to where the number originally was and applies the same swaps to it.
#include <stdio.h>
#define ELEMENTS 10
void main(void)
{
// example input for execution
int numbers[10] = {9,4,5,1,8,2,3,6,0,7};
// tracks ordering of indices
int indexes[10] = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
int k = 6;
int i, j;
int max, temp;
// Partial selection sort, move k max elements to front
for (i = 0; i < k; i++)
{
max = i;
// Find next max index
for (j = i+1; j < ELEMENTS; j++)
{
if (numbers[j] > numbers[max]) {
max = j;
}
}
// Swap numbers in input array
temp = numbers[i];
numbers[i] = numbers[max];
numbers[max] = temp;
// Swap indexes in tracking array
temp = indexes[i];
indexes[i] = indexes[max];
indexes[max] = temp;
}
for (i = 0; i < k; i++) {
printf("%d -> %d\n", indexes[i], numbers[i]);
}
}
And the output:
0 -> 9
4 -> 8
9 -> 7
7 -> 6
2 -> 5
1 -> 4
Here's the answer I have for you.
I would love some constructive criticism on it from anyone who can provide some.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main()
{
int numbers[10] = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9};
int *ptrNumbers[10];
int i=0;
for(; i < 10; i++){
ptrNumbers[i] = &numbers[i]; // assign the addresses
}
int topSix[6];
int topSixIndex=0;
for(; topSixIndex < 6; topSixIndex++){
int **best = NULL; // Pointer to the pointer to the value.
int checkIndex=0;
for(; checkIndex < 10; checkIndex++){
if(ptrNumbers[checkIndex] != NULL){
if(!best){
/* best is not yet defined */
best = &ptrNumbers[checkIndex];
// best now points to the pointer for numbers[checkIndex]
}else if(*ptrNumbers[checkIndex] > **best){
// this else if statement could be attached to the main if as
// an or condition, but I've separated it for readability.
best = &ptrNumbers[checkIndex];
// best now points to the pointer for numbers[checkIndex]
}
}
}
// assign the topSix position and flag the ptrNumbers
topSix[topSixIndex] = **best;
*best = NULL;
}
// now we'll print the numbers
for(topSixIndex = 0; topSixIndex < 6; topSixIndex++){
printf("%d\n", topSix[topSixIndex]);
}
return 0;
}
Essentially the program works like this: Given an array of ten numbers, a second array is constructed to house pointers to those 10 numbers. A third array is then constructed to house the values of the top 6 numbers. A for loop is then initialized to loop 6 times to find the highest unrecorded value. When the highest value is found by looping the pointer array, the value is assigned to the next index of the top six array. Once that value is added, the pointer array's index that points to the top six value is then assigned to NULL. This acts as a flag insuring that the value will not be added again. Finally, all numbers are printed out.
After running this code, the output I received was:
9
8
7
6
5
4
Edit: as a note, the ordering number's can be stored in a second array. You would simply need to track the checkIndex of the highest value and then assign it to a second array which contained the index values.
maybe you aren't looking for a code-only answer, but this will work:
#include <limits.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>
// return index of max element
int max_index( int* vec, int sz )
{
int idx, max, i;
if(!sz) return -1;
idx = 0;
max = vec[0];
for(i=1; i<sz; ++i)
{
if( vec[i] > max )
{
max = vec[i];
idx = i;
}
}
return idx;
}
// return indexes of N top elements
void top( int* vec, int sz, int* out_vec, int N )
{
int i, *tmp, idx;
tmp = (int*) malloc( sz*sizeof(int) );
memcpy( tmp, vec, sz*sizeof(int) );
for(i=0; i<N; ++i )
{
idx = max_index(tmp,sz);
out_vec[i]=idx;
tmp[idx] = INT_MIN;
}
free(tmp);
}
see it live here
Make an array of struct that contain data and index, then sort it and pick up first or last 6 elements to output.
Say that you are given an array numbers. Then create an array indexes with the same size as numbers in such a way that its values are equal to their indexes. Here is an illustration:
numbers = [ 1, 7, 3, 9, 2, 0 ]
indexes = [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]
Sort numbers in descending order, performing the same operations on indexes. In the end, you should end up with something like this:
numbers = [ 9, 7, 3, 2, 1, 0 ]
indexes = [ 3, 1, 2, 4, 0, 5 ]
Finally, all you need to do is work with the first six elements of these arrays.
#include <stdio.h>
#define TRUE 1
#define FALSE 0
int contains(int array[], int array_size, int value)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < array_size; i++)
{
if (array[i] == value)
{
return TRUE;
}
}
return FALSE;
}
int main()
{
int numbers[] = { 1, 7, 3, 9, 2, 0 };
int indexes[] = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
int numbers_size = 6;
int largest[] = { -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1 };
int largest_index = 0;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 6; i++)
{
int j;
int max_index = -1;
int max = -2147483648;
for (j = 0; j < numbers_size; j++)
{
if (numbers[j] >= max && contains(largest, numbers_size, j) == FALSE)
{
max_index = j;
max = numbers[max_index];
}
}
largest[largest_index++] = max_index;
}
for (i = 0; i < 6; ++i)
{
printf("%d->%d\n", largest[i], numbers[largest[i]]);
}
return 0;
}
You probably should use bubblesort (and keep a function holding all the original indexes) and then just make it show the 6 first number of both arrays (from the indexes array and from the array you sorted itself)

Longest increasing sequence in an array in C

I want to make a program that returns me the longest increasing sequence in an array.
For example:
Input: 1, 2, 3, 2, 6, 2
Output: 1, 2, 3
Input: 4, 3, 1, 2, 4, 6, 4, 1, 5, 3, 7
Output: 1, 2, 4, 6
I managed to put together a code, but this only returns me the first sequence of consecutive, increasing numbers:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main() {
int j = 0;
int cou = 0;
int max = 0;
// c = final array; will contain the longest consecutive, increasing sequence of numbers
int c[10];
int n = 0;
int a[] = {1, 3, 5, 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12};
for (int i = 0; i < (sizeof(a)/sizeof(int)); ++i) {
if (a[i+1] > a[i])
++cou;
if (cou > max) {
max = cou;
c[j] = a[i];
c[j+1] = a[i+1];
j++;
}
if (j > n) //finding the size of my final array
n = j;
else {
cou = 0;
j = 0;
}
}
for (j = 0; j <= n; ++j)
printf("%d ",c[j]);
return 0;
}
So basically, I want the longest sequence of increasing, consecutive numbers.
Been busting my brains on this one for quite a while now, and still haven't managed to crack it open. Any help is welcome.
You need to iterate through array, finding sequences, and comparing their length. So, you need to remember previous length of sequence to compare. And you can't copy result to output array on the fly (if you need output array at all), because you can't predict length of next sequence. I'll better show you an example.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main()
{
int previous_len=0, start=0, c[10], len=0; //c = final array; will contain the longest consecutive, increasing sequence of numbers
int a[] = {1, 3, 5, 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12};
for (int i = 0; i < (sizeof(a)/sizeof(int)); ++i) {
if(a[i+1] > a[i]) {
len++;
if (len > previous_len) {
previous_len=len;
start=i+1-len;
}
} else {
previous_len=len;
len=0;
}
}
for(int i = 0; i <= previous_len; ++i) {
c[i]=a[start+i]; //here you can copy data to output array, if you need it
printf("%d ",c[i]); //you can output a[start+i] instead
}
return 0;
}
It seems to mee that you miss some curly braces:
if(a[i+1] > a[i])
{
++cou;
if (cou>max)
{max = cou;
c[j]=a[i];
c[j+1] = a[i+1];
j++;}
if (j > n) //finding the size of my final array
n=j;
}
else
{cou = 0;
j=0;}
I suggest breaking this down into smaller pieces.
Start with a function:
int sequenceLength(int[] array, int arrayLen, int position)
... which returns the length of the sequence beginning at position. Test it and make sure
it works. You shouldn't need help to write that.
Once you have that, you can write something like:
int longestSequence(int[] array, int arrayLen) {
int longest = 0;
int longestLen = 0;
for(int i=0; i<arrayLen; i++) {
int seqLen = sequenceLength(array, arrayLen, i);
if(seqLen > longestLen) {
longest = i;
longestLen = seqLen;
}
}
return longest;
}
Again, test this and make sure it works for all circumstances.
Finally you need a function:
printSequence(int[] array, int arrayLen, int position)
... which prints the sequence beginning at that position. Again you should be able to tackle this on your own.
Put all those together:
printSequence(array,arrayLen(longestSequence(array,arrayLen)));
It's always easiest to break a challenge like this into smaller pieces to solve it.
There may be more efficient solutions that avoid backtracking, but guessing at your level, I don't think you need to go there.
(Note: although the code here may compile, consider it as pseudocode)
you used a array to store the longest sequence, that made your code go wrong in printing.
And you dint use braces for if() statement that resulted in wrong sequence.
you can make the following changes to make the code work,
int main()
{int j=0, cou=0, max=0, c[10], n=0; //c = final array; will contain the longest consecutive, increasing sequence of numbers
int a[] = {1, 3, 5, 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12};
int i,k,z;
for ( k=0,i = 0; i < (sizeof(a)/sizeof(int)); ++i)
{if(a[i+1] > a[i])
{ ++cou;
if (cou>max)
{max = cou;
z=k;
}
}
else
{
k=i+1;
cou = 0;
j=0;}
}
for( j = z; j <(sizeof(a)/sizeof(int)) ; ++j)
if(a[j]<a[j+1])
printf("%d ",a[j]);
else
break;
printf("%d",a[j]);
return 0;
}

Strange output from Counting Sort in C

I have the following Counting Sort function
/*
*File: countingSort.c
*Description: A counting sort subroutine. Takes as input an array of integers.
* an array length and a range. All values in the input array must fall within [0, range].
* Takes O(range + arrayLen) time and O(range + arrayLen) extra space
*
*/
#include "countingSort.h"
int* countingSort(int unsorted[], int arrayLen, int range) {
int store[range + 1];
int sorted[arrayLen];
for ( int i = 0; i <= range; i++ ) {
store[i] = 0;
}
for ( int i = 0; i < arrayLen; i++ ) {
sorted[i] = 0;
}
for ( int j = 0; j < arrayLen; j++ ) {
store[unsorted[j]] ++;
}
for ( int i = 1; i <= range; i++ ) {
store[i] += store[i-1];
}
for( int j = arrayLen - 1; j >= 0; j-- ) {
sorted[store[unsorted[j]]] = unsorted[j];
store[unsorted[j]] --;
}
return sorted;
}
The function is giving me really strange output. The output is nothing like the input most of the times but sometimes it just works.
Why is this happening?
I am calling it from another file called cSortTest.c.
That file looks like this
/*
*File: cSortTest.c
*Description: Tests countingSort.c
*
*/
#include <stdio.h>
#include "countingSort.h"
int main() {
int data[8] = { 2, 1, 9, 4, 4, 56, 90, 3 };
int* p;
p = countingSort(data, 8, 90);
for ( int i = 0; i < 8; i++ ) {
printf("%d Element: %d\n", i, *(p+i) );
}
}
You are returning a local array variable. This variable is destroyed when the function exits, making the address to it no longer safe or valid to access. In fact accessing it will give you what is called undefined behavior, which explains why it sometimes appears to "work".
This is a classic beginner's mistake in C. You must either have the caller pass in the desired destination array, or use malloc() to allocate "persistent" heap memory and return that:
int* countingSort(int unsorted[], int arrayLen, int range) {
int *sorted = malloc(arrayLen * sizeof *sorted );
if (sorted== NULL)
return NULL;
/* rest of sorting */
return sorted;
}
The arrayLen * sizeof *sorted expression computes the number of bytes required for the allocation. There's no need to use calloc() which clears the memory; you're going to overwrite each element so clearing it is just wasted effort.

Resources