In the following code, once I remove the commented part which compares strings, I am getting a seg 11 fault. I am unable to understand why! Rest of the code is working fine. Any help is appreciated!
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int compare_scores_desc(const void* scorea, const void* scoreb){
int a = *(int*)scorea;
int b = *(int*)scoreb;
return a-b;
}
int compare_names(const void* namea, const void* nameb){
char** a = *(char**)namea;
char** b = *(char**)nameb;
return strcmp(*a,*b);
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[]){
int scores[7] = {456,234,65,563,67,19,100};
int i;
qsort(scores,7,sizeof(int),compare_scores_desc);
puts("\nThese are the scores in order : \n");
for(i=0;i<7;i++)
printf("%i\n",scores[i]);
char *names[] = {"Krishna","Rama","Bhishma","Arjuna"};
/*qsort(names,4,sizeof(char*),compare_names);*/
puts("------------------");
puts("The names in order are : \n");
for(i=0;i<4;i++)
printf("%s\n",names[i]);
return 0;
}
In compare_names(), you are inappropriately dereferencing the arguments after the cast. The types for the local variables are type char **, but you are casting the arguments as char ** and dereferencing that results in a char *.
namea and nameb are pointers to the elements of your array names[] declared in main(). That means, their types are actually pointer to char *. When you dereferenced these arguments but assigned them to a char **, you cause the local variable to treat the char * as a char ** (your compiler should have issued a diagnostic warning you about this problem). Now, you take a pointer value that is a char *, and dereference it when you pass it to strcmp(). This causes the program to treat sizeof(char *) bytes of the string as a pointer value for the strcmp() function. Since 4 or 8 (or whatever sizeof(char *) is) bytes consisting of printable characters reinterpreted as a pointer value rarely yields a valid pointer, when strcmp() tries to use those pointers, a segmentation fault occurs.
One possible fix is to not dereference when you initialize your local variables. However, the arguments are const void *, so you can avoid the cast altogether if you declare your local variables to be a pointer to a const type:
int compare_names(const void* namea, const void* nameb){
char* const * a = namea;
char* const * b = nameb;
return strcmp(*a,*b);
}
Note that your implementation of compare_scores_desc() fails if a - b results in signed integer overflow. For example, if a is INT_MAX and b is -1. You should fix your implementation to work for all cases.
int compare_scores_desc(const void* scorea, const void* scoreb){
const int *a = scorea;
const int *b = scoreb;
return (*a > *b) - (*a < *b);
}
The problem is in your string comparison function, and here is probably the minimal way to fix it:
int compare_names(const void* namea, const void* nameb){
char* a = *(char**)namea;
char* b = *(char**)nameb;
return strcmp(a,b);
}
The namea and nameb arguments are pointers into the string vector. You understand this, which is why you used the char ** type.
However, all you have to do in the function is retrieve the char * pointers from that array. These char * pointers are already strings. You do not have to dereference them again; just pass them to strcmp.
Your original code has a constraint violation which requires a diagnostic. That should have tipped you off:
/* originally */
char** a = *(char**)namea; /* error: initialization from incompatible type */
You're dereferencing a char **, which produces char *, but you're storing that in a char ** again and dereferencing again, thereby wrongly treating the character data as a pointer.
Related
I have a midterm in Saturday, so our teacher gave us the previous year's midterm to help. So there is a problem that I have trouble to understand. The question is 'fill the question marks so that program outputs the string 'accioccium'.
For who do not want to spend on solving, the answers are 1,2 and spell2.
So what is happening here? Especially, what is char* (*a[3]) (char *, char *)? I mean we are creating a char pointer array but what is that paranthesis at the end?
Also, a[0] = fun1 is weird too. Yes, you can assign variables by functions. However, there is no parameter here for fun1 function. Let us say parameters are constant as *s and *p. But this time, what are they?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
char* fun1(char *s, char *p) {
return s+strspn(s,p);}
char* fun2(char *s,char *p) {
return strcat(s,p);}
char* fun3(char *s,char *p){
return strstr(s,p);}
char* (*a[3]) (char *,char *);
int main(void) {
int i;
char spell1[10] = "accio";
char spell2[10] = "aparecium";
char* result;
a[0] = fun1;
a[1] = fun2;
a[2] = fun3;
result = (*a[?]) (spell1, "c");
printf("%s",result);
result = (*a[?]) (?, "c");
printf("%s",result);
return 0;}
Thank you for your time and help.
Especially, what is char* (*a[3]) (char *, char *) ? I mean we are creating a char pointer array but what is that paranthesis at the end?
It's an array of 3 pointers to function that takes 2 arguments pointer to char and returns a pointer to char.
The assignment a[0] = fun1 doesn't need the arguments, fun is not executed, only assigned to the compatible pointer a[0], you only add the parameters later when you actually want to execute the function, which is done for example in the line result = (*a[?]) (spell1, "c");
char* (*a[3]) (char *,char *);
Starting from a and "going clockwise" or "picking things on the right first":
a
[ is array
3]) of 3
(* pointers
(...) at end, to function
char *,char * taking two parameters of type char*
char* at the start, returning value of type char*
This matches signatures of fun1, fun2 snd fun3. and indeed array is filled with pointers to these 3 functions. Function name without () means pointer to function, it does not call the function, and using & to get address is not needed.
I have a function whose argument is const char *array[]
array[0] is the path, the rest are the arguments and it ends with NULL.
However, if I try to do execv(array[0], array) I get expected char * const* but argument is of type const char *
How do I go about this, and what is the difference between char * const* and const char *?
void start(const char *array[]) {
execv(array[0], array);
}
First, the error message is not copied correctly. If I run your code in GCC it shows this message instead (note the final *):
note: expected ‘char * const*’ but argument is of type ‘const char **’
which makes more sense as the message you show in the question, does not match the code you show. There is a mismatch in level or indirection.
That said, let's look at this part:
and what is the difference between char * const* and const char *?
Actually it is
and what is the difference between char * const* and const char **?
The first is a pointer to a const pointer to a char. The char that is pointed to is not const and might in theory be changed by execv.
The latter is a pointer to a pointer to a const char. This means, the char that is pointed to mustn't be modified. It might be some read-only string literal in ROM. If you pass such a pointer to a function that will try to modify it, it will fail in one way or the other. Therefore you are not allowed to pass a "pointer to const" to a function that does not expect it to be const.
That is what the compiler is telling you.
Now, how can you get rid of that warning...
To silence your compiler you could try to use some cast and cheat about real nature of that parameter.
In the end the problem will stay the same. A function trying to modify your read-only memory will not be working properly.
Instead you need to make a copy of your data:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
void start(const char *array[]) {
int i = 0;
// determine number of strings (including NULL)
while (array[i++] != NULL) ;
// Create an array able to hold pointers to copys
char *my_array[i];
// Copy strings into non-const memory
i = 0;
do
my_array[i] = array[i] ? strdup(array[i]) : NULL;
while (array[i++] != NULL);
execv(my_array[0], my_array);
// Free the memory for the copied strings
i = 0;
do
free(my_array[i]);
while (array[i++] != NULL);
}
int main(void)
{
const char *argv[] = {"ls", "ls", NULL};
start(argv);
return 0;
}
I was testing an implementation of a comparator function. So here's my code that worked
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int compare_names(const void* a, const void* b)
{
char* sa = (char*) a;
char* sb = (char*) b;
return strcmp(sa, sb);
}
int main()
{
char *a = "Bianca";
char *b = "Ana";
printf("Comparing %s with %s returns: %i\n", a, b, compare_names(a, b));
return 0;
}
But I don't think it's right as a and b arguments at compare_names function should turn out to be a pointer to a pointer of char. As pointed in a book I've read, the correct code for the compare_names function would be
int compare_names(const void* a, const void* b)
{
char** sa = (char**) a;
char** sb = (char**) b;
return strcmp(*sa, *sb);
}
But when I ran the code I got a segmentation fault (core dumped).
What am I missing here?
EDIT: I'm using gcc on Linux x64.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int compare_names(const void* a, const void* b)
{
char** sa = (char**) a;
char** sb = (char**) b;
return strcmp(*sa, *sb);
}
int main()
{
char *a = "Bianca";
char *b = "Ana";
printf("Comparing %s with %s returns: %i\n", a, b, compare_names(&a, &b));
return 0;
}
Now it's ok. You have to put the address of a and b in the printf parameters, since there are casted to char**.
char** sa = (char**) a; This line says: "If you direference twice your sa you will end up with a char" The problem is that since your a is a pointer to char you can not direference it twice. So the casting you are doing is generally wrong.
When casting, the compiler trys to interpret your *a which is a char as a pointer to char so when the conversion is performed your *sa ends up being a BadPtr since it fails to convert from char to char *.
So in your strcmp() you have two BadPtr.
You are passing char* arguments, not char** arguments. The example code you posted showing char** does the following:
1. Change generic pointer to a pointer to a string.
2. Compare the strings by dereferencing the char** arguments, meaning you're passing char* arguments to strcmp and return the result.
But you passed char* arguments to your comparison function, so the dereferencing ends up passing arguments of type char to strcmp. Since it expects pointers, the char is interpreted as a memory address. Comparing "hello" to "bye" actually compares the string at address 0x67 to the string at address 0x62, which will segfault.
Pass &a and &b to your comparison function to make it not segfault.
Both versions should work, however, for the second version of the "campare_names" function, you should pass an aditional pointer to each of the char pointers when calling the function.
However your version of the function is correct, it only makes sence to use double pointer parameters, when you are expecting that a function wil alter the pointer position or data being pointed. In this case, since the strcmp function only reads the char* data and doesn't make any changes to it, you don't need an aditional pointer.
I'm very much confused about the const keyword. I have a function accepting an array of strings as input parameter and a function accepting a variable number of arguments.
void dtree_joinpaths(char* output_buffer, int count, ...);
void dtree_joinpaths_a(char* output_buffer, int count, const char** paths);
dtree_joinpaths internally invokes dtree_joinpaths_a after it has built an array of strings from the argument list.
void dtree_joinpaths(char* output_buffer, int count, ...) {
int i;
va_list arg_list;
va_start(arg_list, count);
char** paths = malloc(sizeof(char*) * count);
for (i=0; i < count; i++) {
paths[i] = va_arg(arg_list, char*);
}
va_end(arg_list);
dtree_joinpaths_a(output_buffer, count, paths);
}
But the gcc compiler gives me the following error message:
src/dtree_path.c: In function 'dtree_joinpaths':
src/dtree_path.c:65: warning: passing argument 3 of 'dtree_joinpaths_a' from incompatible pointer type
When I change char** paths = malloc(count); to const char** paths = malloc(count);, this error is not showing up anymore. What I don't understand is, that
I thought a pointer to an address can always be casted to a const pointer, but not the other way round (which is what is happening here imo).
This example works: http://codepad.org/mcPCMk3f
What am I doing wrong, or where is my missunderstanding?
Edit
My intent is to make the memory of the input data immutable for the function. (in this case the paths parameter).
The reason char ** -> const char** is a "dangerous" conversion is the following code:
const char immutable[] = "don't modify this";
void get_immutable_str(const char **p) {
*p = immutable;
return;
}
int main() {
char *ptr;
get_immutable_str(&ptr); // <--- here is the dangerous conversion
ptr[0] = 0;
}
The above code attempts to modify a non-modifiable object (the global array of const char), which is undefined behavior. There is no other candidate in this code for something to define as "bad", so const-safety dictates that the pointer conversion is bad.
C does not forbid the conversion, but gcc warns you that it's bad. FYI, C++ does forbid the conversion, it has stricter const-safety than C.
I would have used a string literal for the example, except that string literals in C are "dangerous" to begin with -- you're not allowed to modify them but they have type array-of-char rather than array-of-const char. This is for historical reasons.
I thought a pointer to an address can always be casted to a const pointer
A pointer-to-non-const-T can be converted to a pointer-to-const-T. char ** -> const char** isn't an example of that pattern, because if T is char * then const T is char * const, not const char * (at this point it's probably worthwhile not writing the const on the left any more: write char const * and you won't expect it to be the same as T const where T is char *).
You can safely convert char ** to char * const *, and (for reasons that require a little more than just the simple rule) you can safely convert char ** to char const * const *.
The key is that not the pointer is const. To declare a const pointer, use char *const ptr; or to declare a const pointer to a const pointer, char *const *const ptr;. const char **ptr is a pointer to pointer to const char.
Actually if there is a function that accepts a const char** and you pass a char** , this can lead to a problematic situation and viceversa.
In your specific case you expect that the memory is immutable, but it's not immutable and may change at any time. In a multithreading environment you would expect this memory to be thread safe, and as long as it's living in the stack or heap, you wouldn't need a mutex to access to it.
All this is oriented to avoiding errors, but if you are sure that this wouldn't lead to an error you can simply cast the pointer to const char** .
You cannot pass char ** into const char ** because the compiler cannot guarantee const correctness.
Suppose you had the following code (and it compiled):
void foo(const char **ppc, const char* pc)
{
*ppc = pc; // Assign const char* to const char*
}
void bar()
{
const char c = 'x';
char* pc;
foo(&pc, &c); // Illegal; converting const char* to const char**. Will set p == &c
*pc = 'X'; // Ooops! That changed c.
}
See here for the same example without the function calls.
Given that scanf has (const char *) in the documentation from Microsoft and the answer to this question what the heck is going when I do the same for (char **) promotion to (const char **)?
Basically why does this compile?
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
char szArray[50];
int i = 0;
strcpy(szArray,"10");
/* the following code is upcasting the (char *) to (const char *) */
sscanf(szArray,"%d",&i);
return 0;
}
And why won't this compile?
#include <stdio.h>
void processargs(const char **p)
{
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
processargs(argv);
return 0;
}
Both seem to be doing the same thing to a pointer!
char** -> const char ** is dangerous, since you might end up accidentally modifying the underlying const object.
The correct way to write what you want is:
void processargs(const char * const *p)
{
}
You're allowed to increase access restriction, you just can't decrease it. Going from a normal pointer to a const pointer is fine, going from a const pointer to a normal pointer is not.
The second example doesn't compile because you're not converting a pointer to a const pointer, you're converting from a pointer to one type (char*) to another (const char*). For example, you can change a char** to a char* const*, but not a const char**.
Check if this clarifies for you:
char * a_mutable = /*...*/;
const char * a_constant = /*...*/;
char **pointer_to_mutable = &a_mutable; /* ok */
const char **pointer_to_constant = &a_constant; /* ok */
pointer_to_constant = pointer_to_mutable; /* oops, are you sure? */
*pointer_to_constant = a_mutable; /* valid, but will screw things around */
The last line is valid, since pointer_to_constant is a mutable pointer to a mutable pointer to a constant character, but it would break things since you are making a_constant point to a_mutable. That is why you are not allowed to make pointer_to_constant receive the contents of pointer_to_mutable.
The first example of yours works, because you're converting rvalues of char* to const char*, which is OK (basically because you cannot assign to rvalues). The second doesn't, because the target of a (non-const) pointer is always a lvalue.
Just try (maybe with the aid of the compiler) which operations you can do with char**, which work with const char**, and think if and what types are interchangeable.