How can I make this print properly without using two printf calls?
char* second = "Second%d";
printf("First%d"second,1,2);
The code you showed us is syntactically invalid, but I presume you want to do something that has the same effect as:
printf("First%dSecond%d", 1, 2);
As you know, the first argument to printf is the format string. It doesn't have to be a literal; you can build it any way you like.
Here's an example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(void)
{
char *second = "Second%d";
char format[100];
strcpy(format, "First%d");
strcat(format, second);
printf(format, 1, 2);
putchar('\n');
return 0;
}
Some notes:
I've added a newline after the output. Output text should (almost) always be terminated by a newline.
I've set an arbitrary size of 100 bytes for the format string. More generally, you could declare
char *format;
and initialize it with a call to malloc(), allocating the size you actually need (and checking that malloc() didn't signal failure by returning a null pointer); you'd then want to call free(format); after you're done with it.
As templatetypedef says in a comment, this kind of thing can be potentially dangerous if the format string comes from an uncontrolled source.
(Or you could just call printf twice; it's not that much more expensive than calling it once.)
Use the preprocessor to concatenate the two strings.
#define second "Second%d"
printf("First%d"second,1,2);
Do not do this in a real program.
char *second = "Second %d";
char *first = "First %d";
char largebuffer[256];
strcpy (largebuffer, first);
strcat (largebuffer, second);
printf (largebuffer, 1, 2);
The problem with using generated formats such as the method above is that the printf() function, since it is a variable length argument list, has no way of knowing the number of arguments provided. What it does is to use the format string provided and using the types as described in the format string it will then pick that number and types of arguments from the argument list.
If you provide the correct number of arguments like in the example above in which there are two %d formats and there are two integers provided to be printed in those places, everything is fine. However what if you do something like the following:
char *second = "Second %s";
char *first = "First %d";
char largebuffer[256];
strcpy (largebuffer, first);
strcat (largebuffer, second);
printf (largebuffer, 1);
In this example the printf() function is expecting the format string as well as a variable number of arguments. The format string says that there will be two additional arguments, an integer and a zero terminated character string. However only one additional argument is provided so the printf() function will just use what ever is next on the stack as being a pointer to a zero terminated character string.
If you are lucky, the data that the printf() function interprets as a pointer will a valid memory address for your application and the memory area pointed to will be a couple of characters terminated by a zero. If you are less lucky the pointer will be zero or garbage and you will get an access violation right then and it will be easy to find the cause of the application crash. If you have no luck at all, the pointer will be good enough that it will point to a valid address that is about 2K of characters and the result is that printf() will totally mess up your stack and go into the weeds and the resulting crash data will be pretty useless.
char *second = "Second%d";
char tmp[256];
memset(tmp, 0, 256);
sprintf(tmp, second, 2);
printf("First%d%s", 1,tmp);
Or something like that
I'm assuming you want the output:
First 1 Second 2
To do this we need to understand printf's functionality a little better. The real reason that printf is so useful is that it not only prints strings, but also formats variables for you. Depending on how you want your variable formatted you need to use different formatting characters. %d tells printf to format the variable as a signed integer, which you already know. However, there are other formats, such as %f for floats and doubles, %l% for long integers, and %s for strings, or char*.
Using the %s formatting character to print your char* variable, second, our code looks like this:
char* second = "Second";
printf ( " First %d %s %d ", 1, second, 2 );
This tells printf that you want the first variable formatted as an integer, the second as a string, and the third as another integer.
Related
I was writing a simple program to read a string and then print it.
#include<stdio.h>
// void printString(char *str){
// while(*str!='\0'){
// printf("%c",*str);
// str++;
// }
// printf("\n");
// }
int main(){
char str[50];
printf("Enter Your Name:-");
scanf("%s",&str); // scanf adds '\0' automatically at the end.
char *ptr = str;
// printString(ptr);
printf("Your Name is %s%s",ptr);
return 0;
}
I wrote the above code. At first I didn't know that scanf stops when encounters a space. So I thought that I need to have two %s for printing two words but when I got to know the former part about scanf. I understood the problem but in the process, I encountered another problem which I think is unexpected behavior.
OUTPUT:-
Enter Your Name:-Rachit Mittal
Your Name is Rachit Mittal
This Output, from my understanding is unexpected.
If scanf only reads till it encounter space or new line then string contains only "RACHIT" So in the output screen even after using double %s, It should only print "Rachit" instead of "Rachit Mittal"
I wanna ask why is this so? Is this unexpected behavior because of double %s or something else?
You are invoking undefined behavior by not passing enough arguments to printf. %s%s contains two format specifiers, so printf expects two string arguments to be passed, but you only gave one. In this case, the result could be anything.
Consider enabling warnings to help diagnose these errors (e.g. compiling with -Wall).
You have two %s in the format string, but only one additional argument. So there's no argument corresponding to the second %s. This causes undefined behavior. This means that anything can happen, so nothing should be "unexpected".
It's a bit surprising that this causes it to print the second name from the input. The register or memory location that would have contained an additional argument just happened to point to the remainder of the input buffer used by stdio. This is purely coincidence.
For starters the second argument expression in this call of scanf
scanf("%s",&str);
is incorrect. The type of the expression &str is char ( * )[50] while the conversion specifier %s expects an argument of the type char *. You have to write
scanf( "%s", str );
As for your problem then according to the C Standard (7.21.6.1 The fprintf function)
2 The fprintf function writes output to the stream pointed to by
stream, under control of the string pointed to by format that
specifies how subsequent arguments are converted for output. If
there are insufficient arguments for the format, the behavior is
undefined. If the format is exhausted while arguments remain, the
excess arguments are evaluated (as always) but are otherwise ignored.
The fprintf function returns when the end of the format string is
encountered.
You could write to read several words
scanf( "%49[^\n]", str );
First, I need to execute two commands with system(), for example, I receive an string and open this string with an text editor, like this:
$ ./myprogram string1
And the output should be a command like this:
$ vim string1
But, I cannot find a way to do this like this pseudo code:
system("vim %s",argv[1]); //Error:
test.c:23:3: error: too many arguments to function 'system'
system("vim %s",argv[1]);
Therefore, my solution is store the argv[1] on a char array that already initialized with four characters, like this:
char command[strlen(argv[1])+4];
command[0] = 'v'; command [1] = 'i'; command[2] = 'm'; command[3] = ' ';
And assign the argv[1] to my new char array:
for(int i = 0; i < strlen(argv[1]) ; i++)
command[i+4] = argv[1][i];
And finally:
system(command);
But, if the arguments given to my program has less than 3 characters, its works fine, but if not, some weird characters that I do not expect appear in the output, like this:
./myprogramg 1234
And the output is:
$ vim 12348�M�
How can I solve this bug and why does this happen?
The full code is:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main (int argc,char **argv) {
char command[strlen(argv[1])+4];
command[0] = 'v'; command [1] = 'i'; command[2] = 'm'; command[3] = ' ';
for(int i = 0; i < strlen(argv[1]) ; i++)
command[i+4] = argv[1][i];
system(command);
return 0;
}
You need to NUL terminate your C-style strings, and that includes allocating enough memory to hold the NUL.
Your array is a byte short (must be char command[strlen(argv[1])+4+1]; to leave space for NUL), and you should probably just use something like sprintf to fill it in, e.g.:
sprintf(command, "vim %s", argv[1]);`
That's simpler than manual loops, and it also fills in the NUL for you.
The garbage you see is caused by the search for the NUL byte (which terminates the string) wandering off into unrelated (and undefined for that matter) memory that happens to occur after the buffer.
The reason you're running into problems is that you aren't terminating your command string with NULL. But you really want to use sprintf (or even better to use snprintf) for something like this. It works similarly to printf but outputs to memory instead of stdout and handles the terminating NULL for you. E.g:
char cmd[80];
snprintf(cmd, 80, "vim %s", argv[1])
system(cmd);
As #VTT points out, this simplified code assumes that the value in argv[1] will be less than 75 characters (80 minus 4 for "vim " minus 1 for the NULL character). One safer option would be to verify this assumption first and throw an error if it isn't the case. To be more flexible you could dynamically allocate the cmd buffer:
char *cmd = "vim ";
char *buf = malloc(strlen(argv[1]) + strlen(cmd) + 1);
sprintf(buf, "%s%s", cmd, argv[1]);
system(buf);
free(buf);
Of course you should also check to be sure argc > 1.
I know that there are already good answers here, but I'd like to expand them a little bit.
I often see this kind of code
system("vim %s",argv[1]); //Error:
and beginners often wonder, why that is not working.
The reason for that is that "%s", some_string is not a feature of the C
language, the sequence of characters %s has no special meaning, in fact it is
as meaningful as the sequence mickey mouse.
The reason why that works with printf (and the other members of the
printf-family) is because printf was designed to replace sequences like
%s with a value passed as an argument. It's printf which make %s special,
not the C language.
As you may have noticed, doing "hallo" + " world" doesn't do string
concatenation. C doesn't have a native string type that behaves like C++'s
std::string or Python's String. In C a string is just a sequence of
characters that happen to have a byte with value of 0 at the end (also called
the '\0'-terminating byte).
That's why you pass to printf a format as the first argument. It tells
printf that it should print character by character unless it finds a %,
which tells printf that the next character(s)1 is/are special and
must substitute them with the value passed as subsequent arguments to printf.
The %x are called conversion specifiers and the documentation of printf
will list all of them and how to use them.
Other functions like the scanf family use a similar strategy, but that doesn't
mean that all functions in C that expect strings, will work the same way. In
fact the vast majority of C functions that expect strings, do not work in that
way.
man system
#include <stdlib.h>
int system(const char *command);
Here you see that system is a function that expects one argument only.
That's why your compiler complains with a line like this: system("vim %s",argv[1]);.
That's where functions like sprintf or snprintf come in handy.
1If you take a look at the printf documentation you will see that
the conversion specifier together with length modifiers can be longer than 1
character.
I'm trying to read the characters of a character array by number in c. I've stripped the program down to isolate the problem. I know this is about my misunderstanding of how arrays and memory works and I am ready to be called clueless but I would like to know what I am misunderstanding here. Here is what I have:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
char buffer[] = "stuff";
printf("buffer is %s\n", buffer);
printf("first character of buffer is %s", (char)buffer[0]);
return 0;
}
You have to write the correct format specifier. Now you used %s ...what happens?
It looks for an string which is null terminated. But it doesn't find one. So it simply cant put anything in the output . That's it.
Use %c instead.
In C there is a very big difference between a character and a string.
A character is simply a number in a range of 256 different options.
A string is not really a type of its own, it is merely an array of chars (which, in C, is simply evaluated as a pointer to the first character of the string).
Now, when you type buffer[0], this is evaluated to the value at the beginning of the string (first value in the array). Indeed, this is of char type (and therefore you do not need the (char) casting, because this will not do anything in the case of your code).
What you need is to tell printf() how to evaluate the input that you give it. %s is for a string (an array of chars). But note and remember that buffer[0] is not an array of chars, but rather a char.
So you actually want to use %c, instead of %s. This tells printf() to evaluate the parameter as a char type.
What your code currently does is take the value buffer[0] (which is just a number) and consider it as a pointer to a location in memory where a string is kept, and printf() tries to print this string. But this memory location is simply invalid. It is not a location you've accessed before.
In conclusion you want:
printf("first character of buffer is %c", (char)buffer[0]);
or even simpler:
printf("first character of buffer is %c", buffer[0]);
For other specifiers of the printf() function, look here:
http://www.tutorialspoint.com/c_standard_library/c_function_printf.htm
If you want to print only a single char use %c format.
printf("first character of buffer is %c\n", (char)buffer[0]);
Why does C's printf format string have both %c and %s?
I know that %c represents a single character and %s represents a null-terminated string of characters, but wouldn't the string representation alone be enough?
Probably to distinguish between null terminated string and a character. If they just had %s, then every single character must also be null terminated.
char c = 'a';
In the above case, c must be null terminated. This is my assumption though :)
%s prints out chars until it reaches a 0 (or '\0', same thing).
If you just have a char x;, printing it with printf("%s", &x); - you'd have to provide the address, since %s expects a char* - would yield unexpected results, as &x + 1 might not be 0.
So you couldn't just print a single character unless it was null-terminated (very inefficent).
EDIT: As other have pointed out, the two expect different things in the var args parameters - one a pointer, the other a single char. But that difference is somewhat clear.
The issue that is mentioned by others that a single character would have to be null terminated isn't a real one. This could be dealt with by providing a precision to the format %.1s would do the trick.
What is more important in my view is that for %s in any of its forms you'd have to provide a pointer to one or several characters. That would mean that you wouldn't be able to print rvalues (computed expressions, function returns etc) or register variables.
Edit: I am really pissed off by the reaction to this answer, so I will probably delete this, this is really not worth it. It seems that people react on this without even having read the question or knowing how to appreciate the technicality of the question.
To make that clear: I don't say that you should prefer %.1s over %c. I only say that reasons why %c cannot be replaced by that are different than the other answer pretend to tell. These other answers are just technically wrong. Null termination is not an issue with %s.
The printf function is a variadic function, meaning that it has variable number of arguments. Arguments are pushed on the stack before the function (printf) is called. In order for the function printf to use the stack, it needs to know information about what is in the stack, the format string is used for that purpose.
e.g.
printf( "%c", ch ); tells the function the argument 'ch'
is to be interpreted as a character and sizeof(char)
whereas
printf( "%s", s ); tells the function the argument 's' is a pointer
to a null terminated string sizeof(char*)
it is not possible inside the printf function to otherwise determine stack contents e.g. distinguishing between 'ch' and 's' because in C there is no type checking during runtime.
%s says print all the characters until you find a null (treat the variable as a pointer).
%c says print just one character (treat the variable as a character code)
Using %s for a character doesn't work because the character is going to be treated like a pointer, then it's going to try to print all the characters following that place in memory until it finds a null
Stealing from the other answers to explain it in a different way.
If you wanted to print a character using %s, you could use the following to properly pass it an address of a char and to keep it from writing garbage on the screen until finding a null.
char c = 'c';
printf('%.1s', &c);
For %s, we need provide the address of string, not its value.
For %c, we provide the value of characters.
If we used the %s instead of %c, how would we provide a '\0' after the characters?
Id like to add another point of perspective to this fun question.
Really this comes down to data typing. I have seen answers on here that state that you could provide a pointer to the char, and provide a
"%.1s"
This could indeed be true. But the answer lies in the C designer's trying to provide flexibility to the programmer, and indeed a (albeit small) way of decreasing footprint of your application.
Sometimes a programmer might like to run a series of if-else statements or a switch-case, where the need is to simply output a character based upon the state. For this, hard coding the the characters could indeed take less actual space in memory as the single characters are 8 bits versus the pointer which is 32 or 64 bits (for 64 bit computers). A pointer will take up more space in memory.
If you would like to decrease the size through using actual chars versus pointers to chars, then there are two ways one could think to do this within printf types of operators. One would be to key off of the .1s, but how is the routine supposed to know for certain that you are truly providing a char type versus a pointer to a char or pointer to a string (array of chars)? This is why they went with the "%c", as it is different.
Fun Question :-)
C has the %c and %s format specifiers because they handle different types.
A char and a string are about as different as night and 1.
%c expects a char, which is an integer value and prints it according to encoding rules.
%s expects a pointer to a location of memory that contains char values, and prints the characters in that location according to encoding rules until it finds a 0 (null) character.
So you see, under the hood, the two cases while they look alike they have not much in common, as one works with values and the other with pointers. One is instructions for interpreting a specific integer value as an ascii char, and the other is iterating the contents of a memory location char by char and interpreting them until a zero value is encountered.
I have done a experiment with printf("%.1s", &c) and printf("%c", c).
I used the code below to test, and the bash's time utility the get the runing time.
#include<stdio.h>
int main(){
char c = 'a';
int i;
for(i = 0; i < 40000000; i++){
//printf("%.1s", &c); get a result of 4.3s
//printf("%c", c); get a result of 0.67s
}
return 0;
}
The result says that using %c is 10 times faster than %.1s. So, althought %s can do the job of %c, %c is still needed for performance.
Since no one has provided an answer with ANY reference whatsoever, here is a printf specification from pubs.opengroup.com which is similar to the format definition from IBM
%c
The int argument shall be converted to an unsigned char, and the resulting byte shall be written.
%s
The argument shall be a pointer to an array of char. Bytes from the array shall be written up to (but not including) any terminating null byte. If the precision is specified, no more than that many bytes shall be written. If the precision is not specified or is greater than the size of the array, the application shall ensure that the array contains a null byte.
What is the use of the %n format specifier in C? Could anyone explain with an example?
Most of these answers explain what %n does (which is to print nothing and to write the number of characters printed thus far to an int variable), but so far no one has really given an example of what use it has. Here is one:
int n;
printf("%s: %nFoo\n", "hello", &n);
printf("%*sBar\n", n, "");
will print:
hello: Foo
Bar
with Foo and Bar aligned. (It's trivial to do that without using %n for this particular example, and in general one always could break up that first printf call:
int n = printf("%s: ", "hello");
printf("Foo\n");
printf("%*sBar\n", n, "");
Whether the slightly added convenience is worth using something esoteric like %n (and possibly introducing errors) is open to debate.)
Nothing printed. The argument must be a pointer to a signed int, where the number of characters written so far is stored.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int val;
printf("blah %n blah\n", &val);
printf("val = %d\n", val);
return 0;
}
The previous code prints:
blah blah
val = 5
I haven't really seen many practical real world uses of the %n specifier, but I remember that it was used in oldschool printf vulnerabilities with a format string attack quite a while back.
Something that went like this
void authorizeUser( char * username, char * password){
...code here setting authorized to false...
printf(username);
if ( authorized ) {
giveControl(username);
}
}
where a malicious user could take advantage of the username parameter getting passed into printf as the format string and use a combination of %d, %c or w/e to go through the call stack and then modify the variable authorized to a true value.
Yeah it's an esoteric use, but always useful to know when writing a daemon to avoid security holes? :D
From here we see that it stores the number of characters printed so far.
n The argument shall be a pointer to an integer into which is written the number of bytes written to the output so far by this call to one of the fprintf() functions. No argument is converted.
An example usage would be:
int n_chars = 0;
printf("Hello, World%n", &n_chars);
n_chars would then have a value of 12.
So far all the answers are about that %n does, but not why anyone would want it in the first place. I find it's somewhat useful with sprintf/snprintf, when you might need to later break up or modify the resulting string, since the value stored is an array index into the resulting string. This application is a lot more useful, however, with sscanf, especially since functions in the scanf family don't return the number of chars processed but the number of fields.
Another really hackish use is getting a pseudo-log10 for free at the same time while printing a number as part of another operation.
The argument associated with the %n will be treated as an int* and is filled with the number of total characters printed at that point in the printf.
The other day I found myself in a situation where %n would nicely solve my problem. Unlike my earlier answer, in this case, I cannot devise a good alternative.
I have a GUI control that displays some specified text. This control can display part of that text in bold (or in italics, or underlined, etc.), and I can specify which part by specifying starting and ending character indices.
In my case, I am generating the text to the control with snprintf, and I'd like one of the substitutions to be made bold. Finding the starting and ending indices to this substitution is non-trivial because:
The string contains multiple substitutions, and one of the substitutions is arbitrary, user-specified text. This means that doing a textual search for the substitution I care about is potentially ambiguous.
The format string might be localized, and it might use the $ POSIX extension for positional format specifiers. Therefore searching the original format string for the format specifiers themselves is non-trivial.
The localization aspect also means that I cannot easily break up the format string into multiple calls to snprintf.
Therefore the most straightforward way to find the indices around a particular substitution would be to do:
char buf[256];
int start;
int end;
snprintf(buf, sizeof buf,
"blah blah %s %f yada yada %n%s%n yakety yak",
someUserSpecifiedString,
someFloat,
&start, boldString, &end);
control->set_text(buf);
control->set_bold(start, end);
It doesn't print anything. It is used to figure out how many characters got printed before %n appeared in the format string, and output that to the provided int:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
int resultOfNSpecifier = 0;
_set_printf_count_output(1); /* Required in visual studio */
printf("Some format string%n\n", &resultOfNSpecifier);
printf("Count of chars before the %%n: %d\n", resultOfNSpecifier);
return 0;
}
(Documentation for _set_printf_count_output)
It will store value of number of characters printed so far in that printf() function.
Example:
int a;
printf("Hello World %n \n", &a);
printf("Characters printed so far = %d",a);
The output of this program will be
Hello World
Characters printed so far = 12
Those who want to use %n Format Specifier may want to look at this:
Do Not Use the "%n" Format String Specifier
In C, use of the "%n" format specification in printf() and sprintf()
type functions can change memory values. Inappropriate
design/implementation of these formats can lead to a vulnerability
generated by changes in memory content. Many format vulnerabilities,
particularly those with specifiers other than "%n", lead to
traditional failures such as segmentation fault. The "%n" specifier
has generated more damaging vulnerabilities. The "%n" vulnerabilities
may have secondary impacts, since they can also be a significant
consumer of computing and networking resources because large
guantities of data may have to be transferred to generate the desired
pointer value for the exploit. Avoid using the "%n" format
specifier. Use other means to accomplish your purpose.
Source: link
In my opinion, %n in 1st argument of print function simply record the number of character it prints on the screen before it reach the the %n format code including white spaces and new line character.`
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int i;
printf("%d %f\n%n", 100, 123.23, &i);
printf("%d'th characters printed on the screen before '%%n'", i);
}
output:
100 123.230000
15'th characters printed on the screen before '%n'(with new character).
We can assign the of i in an another way...
As we know the argument of print function:-
int printf(char *control-string, ...);
So, it returns the number the number of characters output. We can assign that return value to i.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int i;
i = printf("%d %f\n", 100, 123.23);
printf("%d'th characters printed on the screen.", i);
}
%n is C99, works not with VC++.