strncpy() and memcpy() are the same?
Because of the fact that strncpy() only accepts char * as parameter,
Icasts the integer arrays to char *.
Why it gets the different output?
Here is My code,
#define _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#define SIZE 5
void print_array(int *array, char *name ,int len) {
int i;
printf("%s ={ ",name);
for(i=0; i<len;i++)
printf("%d," ,array[i]);
printf("}\n");
}
int main(void){
char string1[SIZE] = {'1','2','3','4','\0'};
char string2[SIZE], string3[SIZE];
int array1[SIZE] = {1,2,3,4,5};
int array2[SIZE],array3[SIZE];
strncpy(string2,string1,sizeof(string1));
memcpy(string3, string1,sizeof(string1));
printf("string2 =%s \n",string2);
printf("string3 =%s \n",string3);
strncpy((char *)array2, (char*)array1 , sizeof(array1));
memcpy(array3,array1,sizeof(array1));
print_array(array2,"array2",SIZE);
print_array(array3,"array3",SIZE);
return 0;
}
It turns out
string2 =1234
string3 =1234
array2 ={ 1,0,0,0,0,}
array3 ={ 1,2,3,4,5,}
But Why? It gives different answer?
strncpy((char *)array2, (char*)array1 , sizeof(array1));
Casting array1 to a char * doesn't do what you want. There are no characters at that location, there are only integers (little-endian it seems).
What is happening is that strncpy copies bytes from the integer array until it reaches a 0 byte, which is pretty soon. On the other hand memcpy doesn't care about 0 bytes and just copies the whole thing.
To put it another way, strncpy finds a 0 byte "inside" the first integer and stops copying; it does however fill the destination buffer with zeros up to the specified size.
You can implement (sort of) strncpy with memcpy, but the other way around won't work, because strncpy stops at the "end of the string", which doesn't work at all well for data that isn't a C style string (e.g. has zero bytes in it).
To write strncpy with memcpy would be something like this:
char *strncpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t maxlen)
{
size_t len = strlen(src);
memcpy(dest, src, min(len, maxlen));
if (len < maxlen) memset(dest+len, 0, maxlen-len);
return dest;
}
(Note: The above implementation doesn't work for the case where the src string is not terminated correctly - a real strncpy does cope with this - it could be fixed in the above code, but it gets quite complicated).
Related
This question already has answers here:
Different answers from strlen and sizeof for Pointer & Array based init of String [duplicate]
(4 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void main()
{
unsigned char str[] = "abcdefg";
unsigned char *str1 = (unsigned char*)malloc(sizeof(str) -1);
memcpy(str1, str, (sizeof(str)-1) );
for(int i = 0; i<(sizeof(str1)); i++)
printf("%c", str1[i]);
free(str1);
}
I want copy the string str to str1 but the output is
abcd
It means that only pointer byte(4byte) is copied.
And i try
printf("%d", sizeof(str)-1 );
it's output is 7
What is my mistake?
it mean that only pointer byte(4byte) is copied.
No, it does not. You're assuming that your printout is correct, which it is not. You can use sizeof on arrays but not on pointers. Well, you can, but it means something different.
Everything is copied. You're just printing the first four characters. Change to:
for(int i = 0; i<(sizeof(str) - 1); i++)
Also, don't cast malloc. Here is why: Do I cast the result of malloc?
First the mistakes and then the correct code:
Mistakes:
Don't ever use sizeof(str) to get the length of the string. It doesn't work with pointers. Instead, use strlen(str) + 1.
You are subtracting 1 from the size of the string on malloc call. Why? You are not making space for the ending NULL character.
When copying strings, if you know that the destination string is large enough to store the source, use strcpy instead of memcpy. If you only want an additional size parameter like in memcpy, use strncpy. memcpy is not meant to deal with strings, but with plain arrays.
The correct type to use for strings is char, not unsigned char.
Not really a mistake, but to print a string you can use printf("%s", str) or puts(str). Why bother with a for loop?
void main() is prohibited by the C standard.
Correct code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main()
{
char str[] = "abcdefg";
char str1* = malloc(strlen(str) + 1);
strcpy(str1, str);
puts(str1);
free(str1);
//return 0; - default in C99 and later
}
str1 is a pointer whereas str is a character array. When you say sizeof(str1) in your for loop, it iterates 4 times because sizeof(str1) must have evaluated to 4(a 32 bit compiler) whereas sizeof(str) evaluates to the correct length.
You should read What is the size of a pointer? once to know more about size of pointers.
Fixed code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
void main()
{
unsigned char str[] = "abcdefg";
unsigned char *str1 = (unsigned char*)malloc(sizeof(str) -1);
memcpy(str1, str, (sizeof(str)-1) );
for(int i = 0; i<(sizeof(str) - 1); i++)
printf("%c", str1[i]);
free(str1);
}
I am studying for a Data Structures and Algorithms exam. One of the sample questions related to dynamic memory allocation requires you to create a function that passes a string, which takes it at copies it to a user defined char pointer. The question provides the struct body to start off.
I did something like this:
typedef struct smart_string {
char *word;
int length;
} smart_string;
smart_string* create_smart_string(char *str)
{
smart_string *s = (smart_string*)malloc(sizeof(smart_string));
s->length = strlen(str);
s->word = malloc(s->length);
strcpy(s->word, str);
return s;
}
But the answer was this
typedef struct smart_string {
char *word;
int length;
} smart_string;
smart_string *create_smart_string(char *str)
{
smart_string *s = malloc(sizeof(smart_string));
s->length = strlen(str);
s->word = malloc(sizeof(char) * (s->length + 1));
strcpy(s->word, str);
return s;
}
I went on code:blocks and tested them both to see any major differences. As far as I'm aware, their outputs were the same.
I did my code the way it is because I figured if we were to allocate a specific block of memory to s->word, then it should be the same number of bytes as s ->length, because that's the string we want to copy.
However the correct answer below multiplies sizeof(char) (which is just 1 byte), with s->length + 1. Why the need to add 1 to s->length? What's the importance of multiplying s->length by sizeof(char)? What mistakes did I make in my answer that I should look out for?
sizeof(char) == 1 by definition, so that doesn't matter.
You should not cast the result of malloc: Do I cast the result of malloc?
And your only real difference is that strlen returns the length of the string, not including the terminating NUL ('\0') character, so you need to add + 1 to the size of the buffer as in the solution.
If you copy there the string, the terminating character won't be copied (or worse, it will be copied on some other memory), and therefore, any function that deals with strings (unless you use special safety functions such as strscpy) will run through the buffer and past it since they won't find the end. At that point it is undefined behaviour and everything can happen, even working as expected, but can't rely on that.
The reason it is working as expected is because probably the memory just next to the buffer will be 0 and therefore it is being interpreted as the terminating character.
Your answer is incorrect because it doesn't account for the terminating '\0'-character. In C strings are terminated by 0. That's how their length can be determined. A typical implementation of strlen() would look like
size_t strlen(char const *str)
{
for (char const *p = str; *p; ++p); // as long as p doesn't point to 0 increment p
return p - str; // the length of the string is determined by the distance of
} // the '\0'-character to the beginning of the string.
But both "solutions" are fubar, though. Why would one allocate a structure consisting of an int and a pointer on the free-store ("heap")!? smart_string::length being an int is the other wtf.
#include <stddef.h> // size_t
typedef struct smart_string_tag { // *)
char *word;
size_t length;
} smart_string_t;
#include <assert.h> // assert()
#include <string.h> // strlen(), strcpy()
#include <stdlib.h> // malloc()
smart_string_t create_smart_string(char const *str)
{
assert(str); // make sure str isn't NULL
smart_string_t new_smart_string;
new_smart_string.length = strlen(str);
new_smart_string.word = calloc(new_smart_string.length + 1, sizeof *new_smart_string.word);
if(!new_smart_string.word) {
new_smart_string.length = 0;
return new_smart_string;
}
strcpy(new_smart_string.word, str);
return new_smart_string;
}
*) Understanding C Namespaces
I know this code is sloppy, I'm trying to relearn string manipulation in C. If I have a string ABBCCCD and I want to store the separate letters in a struct, is there an efficient way to do so? I have some code down below to demonstrate the long way of what I'm trying to do. (Also, do I have to manually add the null-terminator when I'm doing a strncpy?)
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct dst_struct {
char a[2];
char b[3];
char c[4];
char d[2];
} dst_struct_t;
int main(void) {
char* test = "ABBCCCD";
char* src = malloc(strlen(test)+1);
strncpy(src, test, strlen(test)+1);
printf("%s\n", src);
dst_struct_t dst;
strncpy(dst.a, src, 1);
strncpy(dst.b, src+1, 2);
strncpy(dst.c, src+3, 3);
strncpy(dst.d, src+6, 1);
printf("dst.a: %s\n", dst.a);
printf("dst.b: %s\n", dst.b);
printf("dst.c: %s\n", dst.c);
printf("dst.d: %s\n", dst.d);
free(src);
}
There isn't really any better way to do this, except that you don't need to copy test to src first.
You also need to add the null terminators to all the strings. It would probably be best to write a function that does both steps: strncpy() and adding the null terminator.
function copy_n(char *dest, char *src, size_t offset, size_t len) {
strncpy(src+offset, dest, len);
dest[len] = '\0';
}
int main(void) {
char* test = "ABBCCCD";
copy_n(dst.a, test, 0, 1);
copy_n(dst.b, test, 1, 2);
copy_n(dst.c, test, 3, 3);
copy_n(dst.d, test, 6, 1);
printf("dst.a: %s\n", dst.a);
printf("dst.b: %s\n", dst.b);
printf("dst.c: %s\n", dst.c);
printf("dst.d: %s\n", dst.d);
}
From the strcpy/strncpy man page:
char *strcpy(char *dest, const char *src);
char *strncpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t n);
The strcpy() function copies the string pointed to by src, including the terminating null byte ('\0'), to the buffer pointed to by dest. The strings may not overlap, and the destination string dest must be large enough to receive the copy. Beware of buffer overruns! (See BUGS.)
The strncpy() function is similar, except that at most n bytes of src are copied. Warning: If there is no null byte among the first n bytes of src, the string placed in dest will not be null-terminated.
The n argument of strncpy is generally meant to be the length of the destination buffer, as the point of the function is to be like strcpy but prevent overflowing the destination buffer if the source string is too long or not NULL-terminated. If used in that manner, your destination string will be NULL-terminated if the source string fits that length, otherwise the final byte of the buffer will contain the nth character of the source string.
However, the way you seem to be using strncpy is to set the exact number of characters you want to copy from the source buffer to place in the destination buffer. That is not really the intended purpose of strncpy. Instead, what you'd want to use is memcpy, since you are really not concerned with the zero-termination of the source string, but rather just copying a set number of characters from a set location. And yes, you will have to manually add the null-terminator if you use memcpy.
#include <stdio.h>
int main ()
{
char *ptr = "stackoverflow"
}
Is there any way to find the length of stackoverflow pointed by ptr, as sizeof ptr always gives 4
Use strlen to find the length of (number of characters in) a string
const char *ptr = "stackoverflow";
size_t length = strlen(ptr);
Another minor point, note that ptr is a string literal (a pointer to const memory which cannot be modified). Its better practice to declare it as const to show this.
sizeof() returns the size required by the type. Since the type you pass to sizeof in this case is a pointer, it will return size of the pointer.
If you need the size of the data pointed by a pointer you will have to remember it by storing it explicitly.
sizeof() works at compile time. so, sizeof(ptr) will return 4 or 8 bytes typically. Instead use strlen.
The strlen() function provided by string.h gives you how many "real characters" the string pointed by the argument contains. However, this length does not include the terminating null character '\0'; you have to consider it if you need the length to allocate memory.
That 4 bytes is the size of a pointer to char on your platform.
#include<stdio.h>
main()
{
int mystrlen(char *);
char str[100];
char *p;
p=str;
printf("Enter the string..?\n");
scanf("%s",p);
int x=mystrlen(p);
printf("Length of string is=%d\n",x);
}
int mystrlen(char *p)
{
int c=0;
while(*p!='\0')
{
c++;
*p++;
}
return(c);
}
simple code to understand
You are looking for the strlen() function.
You can try using:
char *ptr = "stackoverflow"
size_t len = strlen(ptr);
if ptr length is an argument of a function it's reasonable to use pointers as a strings. we can get string length by following code:
char *ptr = "stackoverflow";
length=strlen((const char *)ptr);
And for more explanation, if string is an input string by user with variable length, we can use following code:
unsigned char *ptr;
ptr=(unsigned char *)calloc(50, sizeof(unsigned char));
scanf("%s",ptr );
length=strlen((const char *)ptr);
Purely using pointers you can use pointer arithmetic:
int strLen(char *s)
{
int *p = s;
while(*p !=’\0’)
{
p++; /* increase the address until the end */
}
Return p – s; /* Subtract the two addresses, end - start */
}
Even though this is a generic C question, it gets pretty high hits when looking this question up for C++. Not only was I in C/C++ territory, I also had to be mindful of Microsoft's Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) Banned Function Calls for a specific project which made strlen a no-go due to,
For critical applications, such as those accepting anonymous Internet connections, strlen must also be replaced...
Anyway, this answer is basically just a twist on the answers from the others but with approved Microsoft C++ alternative function calls and considerations for wide-character handling in respect to C99's updated limit of 65,535 bytes.
#include <iostream>
#include <Windows.h>
int wmain()
{
// 1 byte per char, 65535 byte limit per C99 updated standard
// https://stackoverflow.com/a/5351964/3543437
const size_t ASCII_ARRAY_SAFE_SIZE_LIMIT = 65535;
// Theoretical UTF-8 upper byte limit of 6; can typically use 16383 for 4 bytes per char instead:
// https://stijndewitt.com/2014/08/09/max-bytes-in-a-utf-8-char/
const size_t UNICODE_ARRAY_SAFE_SIZE_LIMIT = 10922;
char ascii_array[] = "ACSCII stuff like ABCD1234.";
wchar_t unicode_array[] = L"Unicode stuff like → ∞ ∑ Σὲ γνωρίζω τὴν ደሀ ᚦᚫᛏ.";
char * ascii_array_ptr = &ascii_array[0];
wchar_t * unicode_array_ptr = &unicode_array[0];
std::cout << "The string length of the char array is: " << strnlen_s(ascii_array_ptr, ASCII_ARRAY_SAFE_SIZE_LIMIT) << std::endl;
std::wcout << L"The string length of the wchar_t array is: " << wcsnlen_s(unicode_array_ptr, UNICODE_ARRAY_SAFE_SIZE_LIMIT) << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Output:
The string length of the char array is: 27
The string length of the wchar_t array is: 47
strlen() gives you the exact length of the string [excluding '\0']
sizeof() gives you the size of the data type used.
// stackoverflow = 13 Characters
const char* ptr = "stackoverflow";
strlen(ptr); // 13 bytes - exact size (NOT includes '\0')
sizeof(ptr); // 4 bytes - Size of integer pointer used by the platform
sizeof(*ptr); // 1 byte - Size of char data type
strlen("stackoverflow"); // 13 bytes - exact size
sizeof("stackoverflow"); // 14 bytes - includes '\0'
#include<stdio.h>
int main() {
char *pt = "String of pointer";
int i = 0;
while (*pt != '\0') {
i++;
pt++;
}
printf("Length of String : %d", i);
return 0;
}
We can also use strlen() function or sizeof() operator which is builtin in C.
We can also take help of pointer arithmetic as above example.
I am having trouble concatenating strings in C, without strcat library function. Here is my code
#include<stdio.h>
#include<string.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
int main()
{
char *a1=(char*)malloc(100);
strcpy(a1,"Vivek");
char *b1=(char*)malloc(100);
strcpy(b1,"Ratnavel");
int i;
int len=strlen(a1);
for(i=0;i<strlen(b1);i++)
{
a1[i+len]=b1[i];
}
a1[i+len]='\0';
printf("\n\n A: %s",a1);
return 0;
}
I made corrections to the code. This is working. Now can I do it without strcpy?
Old answer below
You can initialize a string with strcpy, like in your code, or directly when declaring the char array.
char a1[100] = "Vivek";
Other than that, you can do it char-by-char
a1[0] = 'V';
a1[1] = 'i';
// ...
a1[4] = 'k';
a1[5] = '\0';
Or you can write a few lines of code that replace strcpy and make them a function or use directly in your main function.
Old answer
You have
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...
a1 [V|i|v|e|k|0|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_]
b1 [R|a|t|n|a|v|e|l|0|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_]
and you want
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...
a1 [V|i|v|e|k|R|a|t|n|a|v|e|l|0|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_]
so ...
a1[5] = 'R';
a1[6] = 'a';
// ...
a1[12] = 'l';
a1[13] = '\0';
but with loops and stuff, right? :D
Try this (remember to add missing bits)
for (aindex = 5; aindex < 14; aindex++) {
a1[aindex] = b1[aindex - 5];
}
Now think about the 5 and 14 in the loop above.
What can you replace them with? When you answer this, you have solved the programming problem you have :)
char a1[] = "Vivek";
Will create a char array a1 of size 6. You are trying to stuff it with more characters than it can hold.
If you want to be able to accommodate concatenation "Vivek" and "Ratnavel" you need to have a char array of size atleast 14 (5 + 8 + 1).
In your modified program you are doing:
char *a1=(char*)malloc(100); // 1
a1 = "Vivek"; // 2
1: Will allocate a memory chunk of size 100 bytes, makes a1 point to it.
2: Will make a1 point to the string literal "Vivek". This string literal cannot be modified.
To fix this use strcpy to copy the string into the allocated memory:
char *a1=(char*)malloc(100);
strcpy(a1,"Vivek");
Also the for loop condition i<strlen(b1)-1 will not copy last character from the string, change it to i<strlen(b1)
And
a1[i]='\0';
should be
a1[i + len]='\0';
as the new length of a1 is i+len and you need to have the NUL character at that index.
And don't forget to free your dynamically allocated memory once you are done using it.
You cannot safely write into those arrays, since you have not made sure that enough space is available. If you use malloc() to allocate space, you can't then overwrite the pointer by assigning to string literal. You need to use strcpy() to copy a string into the newly allocated buffers, in that case.
Also, the length of a string in C is computed by the strlen() function, not length() that you're using.
When concatenating, you need to terminate at the proper location, which your code doesn't seem to be doing.
Here's how I would re-implement strcat(), if needed for some reason:
char * my_strcat(char *out, const char *in)
{
char *anchor = out;
size_t olen;
if(out == NULL || in == NULL)
return NULL;
olen = strlen(out);
out += olen;
while(*out++ = *in++)
;
return anchor;
}
Note that this is just as bad as strcat() when it comes to buffer overruns, since it doesn't support limiting the space used in the output, it just assumes that there is enough space available.
Problems:
length isn't a function. strlen is, but you probably shouldn't call it in a loop - b1's length won't change on us, will it? Also, it returns a size_t, which may be the same size as int on your platform but will be unsigned. This can (but usually won't) cause errors, but you should do it right anyway.
a1 only has enough space for the first string, because the compiler doesn't know to allocate extra stack space for the rest of the string since. If you provide an explicit size, like [100], that should be enough for your purposes. If you need robust code that doesn't make assumptions about what is "enough", you should look into malloc and friends, though that may be a lesson for another day.
Your loop stops too early. i < b1_len (assuming you have a variable, b1_len, that was set to the length of b1 before the loop began) would be sufficient - strlen doesn't count the '\0' at the end.
But speaking of counting the '\0' at the end, a slightly more efficient implementation could use sizeof a1 - 1 instead of strlen(a1) in this case, since a1 (and b1) are declared as arrays, not pointers. It's your choice, but remember that sizeof won't work for pointers, so don't get them mixed up.
EDIT: New problems:
char *p = malloc(/*some*/); p = /* something */ is a problem. = with pointers doesn't copy contents, it copies the value, so you're throwing away the old pointer value you got from malloc. To copy the contents of a string into a char * (or a char [] for that matter) you'd need to use strcpy, strncpy, or (my preference) memcpy. (Or just a loop, but that's rather silly. Then again, it may be good practice if you're writing your own strcat.)
Unless you're using C++, I wouldn't cast the return value of malloc, but that's a religious war and we don't need one of those.
If you have strdup, use it. If you don't, here is a working implementation:
char *strdup(const char *c)
{
size_t l = strlen(c);
char *d = malloc(l + 1);
if(d) memcpy(d, c, l + 1);
return d;
}
It is one of the most useful functions not in the C standard library.
You can do it using strcpy() too ;)
char *a = (char *) malloc(100);
char *b = (char *) malloc(100);
strcpy(a, "abc"); // initializes a
strcpy(b, "def"); // and b
strcpy((a + strlen(a)), b); // copy b at end of a
printf("%s\n",a); // will produce: "abcdef"
i think this is an easy one.
#include<stdio.h>
int xstrlen(char *);
void xstrcat(char *,char *,int);
void main()
{
char source[]="Sarker";
char target[30]="Maruf";
int j=xstrlen(target);
xstrcat(target,source,j);
printf("Source String: %s\nTarget String: %s",source,target);
}
int xstrlen(char *s)
{
int len=0;
while(*s!='\0')
{
len++;
s++;
}
return len;
}
void xstrcat(char *t,char *s,int j)
{
while(*t!='\0')
{
*t=*t;
t++;
}
while(*s!='\0')
{
*t=*s;
s++;
t++;
}
}
It is better to factor out your strcat logic to a separate function. If you make use of pointer arithmetic, you don't need the strlen function:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h> /* To completely get rid of this,
implement your our strcpy as well */
static void
my_strcat (char* dest, char* src)
{
while (*dest) ++dest;
while (*src) *(dest++) = *(src++);
*dest = 0;
}
int
main()
{
char* a1 = malloc(100);
char* b1 = malloc(100);
strcpy (a1, "Vivek");
strcpy (b1, " Ratnavel");
my_strcat (a1, b1);
printf ("%s\n", a1); /* => Vivek Ratnavel */
free (a1);
free (b1);
return 0;
}