I have the following pointer to structure
struct ALIST
{
short sPeriod;
long lDate;
}*list_ptr;
list_ptr = malloc(sizeof(*list_ptr));
Now if I have a global variable sIndex which I initialize to zero, is it possible to do this?
(list_ptr + sIndex)->sPeriod = period_variable;
(list_ptr + sIndex)->lDate = date_variable;
sIndex++
Is there a more efficient method?
This looks like you want to allocate a dynamic array. Make a size variable and set it to your starting size for the array.
Something like:
size_t list_size = 10;
struct ALIST list_ptr = 0;
size_t i;
list_ptr = malloc(sizeof(*list_ptr) * list_size);
for(i=0; i<list_size; ++i) {
list_ptr[i].sPeriod = period;
list_ptr[i].lDate = date;
}
Now, if you don't know the size of the array then what you want ends up looking a lot like a C++ std::vector.
I'd build a C version that wraps the necessary information in a struct. Use realloc to resize it.
It might look like (NOTE THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY UNTESTED):
struct dynamic_ALIST {
struct ALIST *array;
size_t size;
size_t capacity;
};
void dynamic_ALIST_construct(struct dynamic_ALIST *x, size_t initial_size)
{
x->array = 0;
x->size = 0;
x->capacity = 0;
dynamic_ALIST_reserve(x, initial_size);
}
void dynamic_ALIST_reserve(struct dynamic_ALIST *x, size_t size)
{
struct ALIST *tmp = realloc(x->array, sizeof(*tmp) * size);
if(!tmp) abort();
x->array = tmp;
x->capacity = size;
}
struct ALIST* dynamic_ALIST_get(struct dynamic_ALIST *x, size_t offset)
{
if(offset < x->size) {
return x->array + offset;
}
if(offset < x->capacity) {
x->size = offset + 1;
return x->array + offset;
}
dynamic_ALIST_reserve(x, offset+1);
return dynamic_ALIST_get(x, offset);
}
Then you could use it like:
void f()
{
size_t item_index = 0;
struct dynamic_ALIST list;
FILE *fp = fopen("filename");
dynamic_ALIST_construct(list, 0);
while( read_item(fp, dynamic_ALIST_get(list,item_index)) ) {
item_index++;
}
fclose(fp);
}
You can make all kinds of changes to that. The get function might return an error instead of automatically creating new entries. You might make another function that increases the size. You might want to have a function that sets all the values to zero before returning new memory.
If you have a lot of different structs to wrap up you can put ALL of the above dynamic_ALIST struct, and construct, reserve, get functions into a macro. If you do it right then you just say:
NEW_DYNAMIC_STRUCT(ALIST);
And the preprocessor spits out a whole new copy with all the names changed.
I'll answer point by point:
Do those pointer manipulations only if you know what you are doing.
Assuming sIndex to be an int, with sIndex=0;, it is no problem but if you increment sIndex, you don't have that space allocated to use becuase you have malloc'd just one block.
You need to first do your allocation appropriately if you need to access multiple such blocks then:
list_ptr = malloc(sizeof(struct ALIST)*N); //replace N with the number of blocks you want
Related
I am working with dynamic arrays, consider two scenarios -
Scenario 1:
typedef struct
{
int *array;
int dataPtr;
} A;
static A dynaArray;
//Call the function as
dynaAdd(&dynaArray, <pointer to data block>, <length> );
static bool dynaAdd(A *data, int *dataCopy, int len)
{
int newlen = (data->dataPtr + len);
data->array = (int *) realloc(data->array, newlen * sizeof(int));
if (!data->array)
{
return FALSE;
}
memcpy(&data->array[data->dataPtr], dataCopy, len* sizeof(int));
data->dataPtr += len; // update data ptr
return TRUE;
}
I create a static struct A data (say) and pass to a function as pointer which reallocates length for A->array everytime and adds data to it, maintaining a dataPtr for index. This works perfectly fine where I can create an A->array of say length 100, use the data and free the pointer and null.
On the other scenario 2 -
static int *dynArray;
//Call the function as
dynaAdd(dynaArray, <pointer to data block>, <len>, <dataIdx> );
static bool dynaAdd(int *data, int *dataCopy, int len, int dataIdx)
{
int newlen = (dataIdx + len);
data = (int *) realloc(data, newlen * sizeof(int));
if (!data)
{
return FALSE;
}
memcpy(&data[dataIdx], dataCopy, len* sizeof(int));
dataIdx += len ;
return TRUE;
}
I just use int *array instead of struct, maintaining a static int dataPtr(say) to keep track of the next index, pass the array pointer to the function and dynamically grow the array and add contents to it. However, the program crashes after creating some x length array (which keeps varying).
Can someone help understand the difference between the two approaches ? In both scenarios, the goal is to create a dynamic array and keep adding contents to it until the certain data index and then free the array.
Thank you.
In the second example, you're modifying data which is local to the function. Such a change is not reflected in the calling function, so dynArray doesn't change. And since you reallocated memory, if the memory moved then this pointer is now invalid and attempting to dereference it triggers undefined behavior.
You need to change the function to accept the address of a int *, i.e. an int **, for the first argument and make the corresponding changes. You'll also want to make dataIdx a int * so changes to that are also propagated back
So your function would now look like this:
static bool dynaAdd(int **data, int *dataCopy, int len, int *dataIdx)
{
int newlen = (*dataIdx + len);
*data = realloc(*data, newlen * sizeof(int));
if (!*data)
{
return FALSE;
}
memcpy(&(*data)[*dataIdx], dataCopy, len* sizeof(int));
*dataIdx += len ;
return TRUE;
}
this is how i declare this struct
typedef struct cache{
int vaild;
char* tag;
char* data;
}cache;
this is part of my main which called this function
struct cache **cacheA = createCache(Setnum,(int)pow(2,blocksize),cachesize);
struct cache **cacheB = createCache(Setnum,(int)pow(2,blocksize),cachesize);
and now this is my called function
struct cache ** createCache(int numset, int blocksize, int cachesize){
int numcache = (int)((cachesize/blocksize)*numset);
struct cache out[numset][numcache];
int i,j;
for (i=0; i < numset; i++){
for (j=0; j < numcache; j++){
out[i][j].tag = "0";
out[i][j].vaild = 0;
out[i][j].data ="0";
}
}
return out;
}
and when i try to compile this, it tells me that
return from incompatible pointer type
function returns address of local variable
(which points to the line "return out;")
I have no idea whats wrong with my code, i mean the type of the function return is the same as how i declear "out", so what causes this problem?
You create struct cache out[numset][numcache];
within the function prototyped as: struct cache ** createCache(...).
Then attempt to return out.
It is because struct cache [][] is typed differently than struct cache ** that you are getting the return errors.
Other comments:
1) If you truly do want a pointer to pointer to struct, then malloc or calloc will need to be used at some point to allocate memory.
2) the char * members of the struct also need to be assigned memory before assigning values. For illustration below, they are changed to char []
3) assigning values to strings does not work by using = assignment operator. Use a string function such as strcpy, sprintf, etc.
4) you've named the struct with the same symbol as that of the new type you have created, i.e. cache. In this application, the name cache is not necessary. Also, purely for style, I show the new type in CAPS. This is not necessary, but just a style I use to make the new type more recognizable in code.
In consideration of the comments above, the struct could be changed to the following:
typedef struct { /// don't need name here when it in this application
int vaild;
//char *tag;
char tag[20];//for illustration, to avoid additional dynamic allocation of memory
//char* data;
char data[80];
}CACHE;//capitalization is style only, not a necessity here.
Note, there is no name, but the new type CACHE was created. Now, you can create the function createCache:
CACHE ** createCache(int ncache, int nset)//note for simplicity of freeing this
//object later, simplify number of arguments
{
CACHE **out;
out = calloc(ncache, sizeof(CACHE *));//create array of pointers to CACHE
if(!out) return NULL;
int i;
for (i=0; i < nset; i++)
{
out[i] = calloc(nset, sizeof(CACHE));//create space for each instance
//of CACHE pointed to by array pointers
}
return out;
}
Anytime memory is created on the heap, it needs to be freed. This method will free the CACHE object memory:
void freeCashe(CACHE **a, int nset)
{
int i;
for(i=0; i<nset; i++)
{
if(a[i])free(a[i]);
}
if(a)free(a);
}
Calling these functions as shown below, will create an array of pointers, each pointing to an instance of CACHE where you can use them as intended, then free all of the memory when finished:
int main(void)
{
int cachesize = 20;
int blocksize = 20;
int numset = 10;
//move the calculation out of creation function
//to simplify freeing object later.
int numcache = (int)((cachesize/blocksize)*numset);
CACHE **a = createCache(numcache, numset);
/// use a, then free a
freeCashe(a, numset);
return 0;
}
Your function needs to allocate the memory on the heap rather than the stack. You will need to allocate space on the heap for your array of pointers, and for what they point too.
struct cache ** createCache(int numset, int blocksize, int cachesize){
cache ** out;
int numcache = (int)((cachesize/blocksize)*numset);
size_t headerSize = sizeof(*out)*numset;
size_t bodySize = sizeof(**out)*numcache;
out = malloc(headerSize + (bodySize*numset));
if (out == NULL) {
/* Should probably output some message about being
* insufficient memory here. */
return NULL;
}
int i,j;
for (i=0; i < numset; i++){
/* need to assign our point */
out[i] = (cache*)(((char*)out)+(headerSize+bodySize*i));
for (j=0; j < numcache; j++){
out[i][j].tag = "0";
out[i][j].vaild = 0;
out[i][j].data ="0";
}
}
return out;
}
/* importantly, you want a way to free your allocated memory */
void destroyCache(cache ** ptr) {
free(ptr);
}
PS: You don't have to typedef your struct if you reference it with the struct keyword.
You are wanting a pointer pointer type to be returned, but in order to do that you need to dynamically allocate it. Local stack allocations (i.e. struct cache[x][y]) won't work. You will either get an error or your program will crash when attempting to use the 2D array.
The solution is to either pre-allocate space and pass it in to the function or allocate in the function itself.
Allocation In Function Example:
struct cache ** createCache(int numset, int blocksize, int cachesize){
int numcache = (int)((cachesize/blocksize)*numset);
struct cache **out = malloc(sizeof(struct cache *) * numset); // This line changed.
int i,j;
for (i=0; i < numset; i++){
out[i] = malloc(sizeof(struct cache) * numcache); // This line added.
for (j=0; j < numcache; j++){
out[i][j].tag = malloc(sizeof(char)); // This line added.
out[i][j].data = malloc(sizeof(char)); // This line added.
strcpy(out[i][j].tag, "0");
out[i][j].vaild = 0;
strcpy(out[i][j].data, "0");
}
}
return out;
}
I have created a simple dynamic array in C.
typedef struct varray_t
{
void **memory;
size_t allocated;
size_t used;
int index;
} varray;
void
varray_init(varray **array)
{
*array = (varray*) malloc (sizeof(varray));
(*array)->memory = NULL;
(*array)->allocated = 0;
(*array)->used = 0;
(*array)->index = -1;
}
void
varray_push(varray *array, void *data, size_t size)
{
if ((array->allocated - array->used) < size) {
array->memory = realloc(array->memory, array->allocated + size);
array->allocated = array->allocated + size;
}
array->used = array->used + size;
array->memory[++array->index] = data;
}
int
varray_length(varray *array)
{
return array->index + 1;
}
void
varray_clear(varray *array)
{
int i;
for(i = 0; i < varray_length(array); i++)
{
array->memory[i] = NULL;
}
array->used = 0;
array->index = -1;
}
void
varray_free(varray *array)
{
free(array->memory);
free(array);
}
void*
varray_get(varray *array, int index)
{
if (index < 0 || index > array->index)
return NULL;
return array->memory[index];
}
This is working fine. But to add an item into the array, caller has to pass in the size of the element getting added. I can't figure out another way to get the size from the passed in void*. I am wondering is there a better way to design varray_push(varray *array, void *data, size_t size) so that size can be infered?
Any help would be great
Edited code after the suggestions
My array will contain only pointer elements. I have modified the code according to Blastfurnace's suggestion. New code will use sizeof(void*) and resize memory by a constant propotion to get amortized constant time on inserts.
void
varray_push(varray *array, void *data)
{
size_t toallocate;
size_t size = sizeof(void*);
if ((array->allocated - array->used) < size) {
toallocate = array->allocated == 0 ? size : (array->allocated * 2);
array->memory = realloc(array->memory, toallocate);
array->allocated = array->allocated + toallocate;
}
array->memory[++array->index] = data;
array->used = array->used + size;
}
If the array is going to contain only one type at a time, then you can store the size of the type of the array in varray_init.
Also, my suggestion is that instead of allocating memory fresh for each element, you can allocate memory for constant size each time, i.e. first allocate memory for 16 elements and then when you find that array is full when pushing an element realloc for 16 + 16 = 32 elements. In this way, you can avoid calling malloc again and again and also it is not good idea to keep mallocing for small size data seperately.
EDIT:
After considering Blastfurnace comment, I feel that you should actually be doing a memcpy of the data rather than assignment if your intention is to store the data and not the pointer to the data.
I have a simple to use linked list implementation that you can use. I wouldn't say it is text book quality but it is easy: https://github.com/inorton/xrlist
#include <stdio.h>
#include "xrlist.h"
xr_list_t * mylist = xrlist_new();
xrlist_push(mylist, (void*) ptr1);
xrlist_push(mylist, (void*) ptr2);
You iterate like so:-
xr_list_item_t * iter = mylist->head;
while ( iter != NULL )
{
printf(" * item [0x%x] contains [%s]\n",
(unsigned int) iter->object, (char*) iter->object );
iter = iter->next;
}
You also have the usual remove/add/free functions too. See more examples here.
If you want random access data like a dictionary you can also try out https://github.com/inorton/xrhash
I have to implement game of life, it is almost complete, the last thing I want to do is to allocate my field dynamical. I'm working under Windows, got no Valgrind and I don't no what's the error in my code. Eclipse shows only that the process is not functional anymore.
Can anyone tell me, what's the problem in my code? Or maybe I don't need a 2 dim. array for game of life field?
struct game_field {
int length;
int **field;
};
static struct game_field *new_game_field(unsigned int l) {
struct game_field *pstField;
pstField = calloc(1, sizeof(struct game_field));
pstField->length = l;
pstField->field = malloc(l * sizeof(int*));
for( int i = 0; i < l; i++ ) {
pstField->field[i] = malloc(l * sizeof(int));
if(NULL == pstField->field[i]) {
printf("No memory for line %d\n",i);
}
}
return pstField;
}
You should think a little bit about the structures and what you are storing.
For the game of life you need to know the state of the cell on the board which is indicated by and integer so your struct should become:
struct game_field {
int length;
int *field;
};
And once you know the dimensions of the field you should allocate it once:
struct game_field *gf = calloc(1, sizeof(struct game_field));
gf->length = <blah>;
gf->field = malloc(gf->length*gf->length*sizeof(int));
This way you have an array of integers that you can use as your board.
The first malloc should be:
pstField->field = malloc(l * sizeof(int*));
Your array is int**, so the first level of allocation is an int*.
Edit: Well, I've tested your code and it does not crash for me. The problem might be somewhere else.
Here's a modification of your code that allocates the field in one block, but still lets you use array brackets for both dimensions:
struct game_field {
int length;
int **field;
};
static struct game_field *new_game_field(unsigned int len)
{
struct game_field *pstField;
pstField = malloc(sizeof(struct game_field));
pstField->length = len;
/* allocate enough space for all the row pointers + the row contents */
pstField->field = malloc((len * sizeof(int *)) + (len * len * sizeof(int)));
/* point the row pointers (at the start of the block) at the row contents
* (further into the block). */
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++)
pstField->field[i] = (int *)(&field[len]) + (i * len);
return pstField;
}
This way you can free the field in one shot:
void free_game_field(struct game_field *gf)
{
free(gf->field);
free(gf);
}
And you can keep the bracket notation to access the elements:
int row7col3 = gf->field[7][3];
Note that what you have (here as well as in your original code) is not exactly a two-dimensional array, but an array of pointers to arrays of integers
(there is a difference, but the arr[x][y] notation can work for either one).
How does one malloc an array of structs correctly if each struct contains an array of strings which vary in size?
So each struct might have a different size and would make it impossible to
realloc(numberOfStructs * sizeof(structName))
after
malloc(initialSize * sizeof(structName)
How does one allocate memory for this and keep track of what is going on?
If your structure has a char *, it takes up the size of one pointer. If it has a char[200], it takes up two hundred bytes.
I am making some guesses here, based on the information you have provided. The only reason I can see for wanting to realloc an array of structs is if you want to add more structs to that array. That's cool. There are plenty of reasons to want that kind of dynamic storage. The best way to handle it, especially if the structures are themselves dynamic, is to keep an array of pointers to these structures. Example:
1. Data structure:
typedef struct {
int numberOfStrings;
char ** strings;
}
stringHolder;
typedef struct {
int numberOfStructs;
stringHolder ** structs;
}
structList;
2. Managing dynamic arrays of strings:
void createNewStringHolder(stringHolder ** holder) {
(*holder) = malloc(sizeof(stringHolder));
(*holder)->numberOfStrings = 0;
(*holder)->strings = NULL;
}
void destroyStringHolder(stringHolder ** holder) {
// first, free each individual string
int stringIndex;
for (stringIndex = 0; stringIndex < (*holder)->numberOfStrings; stringIndex++)
{ free((*holder)->strings[stringIndex]); }
// next, free the strings[] array
free((*holder)->strings);
// finally, free the holder itself
free((*holder));
}
void addStringToHolder(stringHolder * holder, const char * string) {
int newStringCount = holder->numberOfStrings + 1;
char ** newStrings = realloc(holder->strings, newStringCount * sizeof(char *));
if (newStrings != NULL) {
holder->numberOfStrings = newStringCount;
holder->strings = newStrings;
newStrings[newStringCount - 1] = malloc((strlen(string) + 1) * sizeof(char));
strcpy(newStrings[newStringCount - 1], string);
}
}
3. Managing a dynamic array of structures:
void createNewStructList(structList ** list, int initialSize) {
// create a new list
(*list) = malloc(sizeof(structList));
// create a new list of struct pointers
(*list)->numberOfStructs = initialSize;
(*list)->structs = malloc(initialSize * sizeof(stringHolder *));
// initialize new structs
int structIndex;
for (structIndex = 0; structIndex < initialSize; structIndex++)
{ createNewStringHolder(&((*list)->structs[structIndex])); }
}
void destroyStructList(structList ** list) {
// destroy each struct in the list
int structIndex;
for (structIndex = 0; structIndex < (*list)->numberOfStructs; structIndex++)
{ destroyStringHolder(&((*list)->structs[structIndex])); }
// destroy the list itself
free((*list));
}
stringHolder * addNewStructToList(structList * list) {
int newStructCount = list->numberOfStructs + 1;
size_t newSize = newStructCount * sizeof(stringHolder *);
stringHolder ** newList = realloc(list->structs, newSize);
if (newList != NULL) {
list->numberOfStructs = newStructCount;
list->structs = newList;
createNewStringHolder(&(newList[newStructCount - 1]));
return newList[newStructCount - 1];
}
return NULL;
}
4. Main program:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main (int argc, char * argv[]) {
structList * allHolders;
createNewStructList(&allHolders, 10);
addStringToHolder(allHolders->structs[4], "The wind took it");
addStringToHolder(allHolders->structs[4], "Am I not merciful?");
addStringToHolder(allHolders->structs[7], "Aziz, Light!");
printf("%s\n", allHolders->structs[4]->strings[0]); // The wind took it
printf("%s\n", allHolders->structs[4]->strings[1]); // Am I not merciful?
printf("%s\n", allHolders->structs[7]->strings[0]); // Aziz, Light!
stringHolder * newHolder = addNewStructToList(allHolders);
addStringToHolder(newHolder, "You shall not pass!");
printf("%s\n", newHolder->strings[0]); // You shall not pass!
printf("%s\n", allHolders->structs[10]->strings[0]); // You shall not pass!
destroyStructList(&allHolders);
return 0;
}
You don't, generally. There are two reasons you might want to do this:
So that a single free() will release the entire block of memory.
To avoid internal memory fragmentation.
But unless you have an exceptional situation, neither are very compelling, because there is crippling drawback to this approach:
If you do this, then block[i] is meaningless. You have not allocated an array. There is no way to tell where your next struct starts without either examining the struct or having outside information about the size/position of your structs in the block.
It is not so clear how your struct type is declared. C99 has a special construct for such things, called flexible array member of a struct:
As a special case, the last element of
a structure with more than one named
member may have an incomplete array
type; this is called a flexible array
member.
You could do something like
typedef struct myString myString;
struct myString { size_t len; char c[]; };
You may then allocate such a beast with
size_t x = 35;
myString* s = malloc(sizeof(myString) + x);
s->len = x;
and reallocate it with
size_t y = 350;
{
myString* tmp = realloc(s, sizeof(myString) + y);
if (!tmp) abort(); // or whatever
tmp->len = y;
}
s = tmp;
To use this more comfortably you'd probably better wrap this into macros or inline functions.