I'm making a dynamic array with int* data type using malloc(). But the problems is, how to know end of array?
There no an equivalent to \0 for int* data type,so, how to do this? Pass size as out parameter of function?
C doesn't manage array lengths, as some other languages do.
you might consider a structure for this:
typedef struct t_thing {
int* things;
size_t count;
} t_thing;
in use:
t_thing t = { (int*)malloc(sizeof(int) * n), n };
There is no "official" equivalent to \0 for integers, but you can certainly use your own value. For example, if your integers represent distances then you can use -1 (not a valid distance) as a sentinel value to indicate the end of the array.
If your integer array can reasonably contain any int value, then you can pass back the size of the allocated array with an additional parameter to your function.
You can use NULL as an end value. You can add an integer to a struct with the array that tracks the number of entries. Or you can track the size separately. You can do it however you want.
C does not know where is the end of your dynamic array. you should remember the size that you allocate for the array.
when u allocate memory with malloc, the number of bytes allocated is stored just before the start of the 'malloc'ated memory. if you know the size, you know the end as well!
This is explained in the bible of C, the K&R book. Wish I could give you the page number as well, but you'll know it when u see it.
Related
before you mark this as a duplicate please notice that I'm looking for a more general solution for arrays of arbitrary dimensions. I have read many posts here or in forums about making 2D or 3D arrays of integers but these are specific solutions for specific dimensions. I want a general solution for an array of any dimension.
First I need to have a type of intlist as defined below:
typedef struct{
int l // length of the list
int * e // pointer to the first element of the array
}intlist;
this actually fills the gap in C for treating arrays just as pointers. using this type I can pass arrays to functions without worrying about loosing the size.
then in the next step I want to have a mdintlist as multidimensional dynamically allocated arrays. the type definition should be something like this:
typedef struct Mdintlist{
intlist d // dimension of the array
/* second part */
}mdintlist;
there are several options for the second part. on option is that to have a pointer towards a mdintlist of lower dimension like
struct Mdintlist * c;
the other options is to use void pointers:
void * c;
I don't know how to continue it from here.
P.S. one solution could be to allocate just one block of memory and then call the elements using a function. However I would like to call the elements in array form. something like tmpmdintlist.c[1][2][3]...
Hope I have explained clearly what I want.
P.S. This is an ancient post, but for those who may end up here some of my efforts can be seen in the Cplus repo.
You can't! you can only use the function option in c, because there is no way to alter the language semantics. In c++ however you can overload the [] operator, and even though I would never do such an ugly thing (x[1][2][3] is alread y ugly, if you continue adding "dimensions" it gets really ugly), I think it would be possible.
Well, if you separate the pointers and the array lengths, you end up with much less code.
int *one_dem_array;
size_t one_dem_count[1];
int **two_dem_array;
size_t two_dem_count[2];
int ***three_dem_array;
size_t three_dem_count[3];
This way you can still use your preferred notation.
int num_at_pos = three_dem_array[4][2][3];
I am currently trying to get the length of a dynamically generated array. It is an array of structs:
typedef struct _my_data_
{
unsigned int id;
double latitude;
double longitude;
unsigned int content_len;
char* name_dyn;
char* descr_dyn;
} mydata;
I intialize my array like that:
mydata* arr = (mydata*) malloc(sizeof(mydata));
And then resized it using realloc and started to fill it with data.
I then attempted to get its size using the code described here.
sizeof(arr) / sizeof(arr[0])
This operation returns 0 even though my array contains two elements.
Could someone please tell me what I'm doing wrong?
If you need to know the size of a dynamically-allocated array, you have to keep track of it yourself.
The sizeof(arr) / sizeof(arr[0]) technique only works for arrays whose size is known at compile time, and for C99's variable-length arrays.
sizeof cannot be used to find the amount of memory that you allocated dynamically using malloc. You should store this number separately, along with the pointer to the allocated chunk of memory. Moreover, you must update this number every time you use realloc or free.
mydata* arr = (mydata*) malloc(sizeof(mydata));
is a pointer and not an array. To create an array of two items of mydata, you need to do the following
mydata arr[2];
Secondly, to allocate two elements of mydata using malloc(), you need to do the following:
mydata* arr = (mydata*) malloc(sizeof(mydata) * 2);
OTOH, length for dynamically allocated memory (using malloc()) should be maintained by the programmer (in the variables) - sizeof() won't be able to track it!
You're trying to use a pretty well known trick to find the number of elements in an array. Unfortunately arr in your example is not an array, it's a pointer. So what you're getting in your sizeof division is:
sizeof(pointer) / sizeof(structure)
Which is probably always going to be 0.
This is well known code to compute array length in C:
sizeof(array)/sizeof(type)
But I can't seem to find out the length of the array passed as an argument to a function:
#include <stdio.h>
int length(const char* array[]) {
return sizeof(array)/sizeof(char*);
}
int main() {
const char* friends[] = { "John", "Jack", "Jim" };
printf("%d %d", sizeof(friends)/sizeof(char*), length(friends)); // 3 1
}
I assume that array is copied by value to the function argument as constant pointer and reference to it should solve this, but this declaration is not valid:
int length(const char**& array);
I find passing the array length as second argument to be redundant information, but why is the standard declaration of main like this:
int main(int argc, char** argv);
Please explain if it is possible to find out the array length in function argument, and if so, why is there the redundancy in main.
sizeof only works to find the length of the array if you apply it to the original array.
int a[5]; //real array. NOT a pointer
sizeof(a); // :)
However, by the time the array decays into a pointer, sizeof will give the size of the pointer and not of the array.
int a[5];
int * p = a;
sizeof(p); // :(
As you have already smartly pointed out main receives the length of the array as an argument (argc). Yes, this is out of necessity and is not redundant. (Well, it is kind of reduntant since argv is conveniently terminated by a null pointer but I digress)
There is some reasoning as to why this would take place. How could we make things so that a C array also knows its length?
A first idea would be not having arrays decaying into pointers when they are passed to a function and continuing to keep the array length in the type system. The bad thing about this is that you would need to have a separate function for every possible array length and doing so is not a good idea. (Pascal did this and some people think this is one of the reasons it "lost" to C)
A second idea is storing the array length next to the array, just like any modern programming language does:
a -> [5];[0,0,0,0,0]
But then you are just creating an invisible struct behind the scenes and the C philosophy does not approve of this kind of overhead. That said, creating such a struct yourself is often a good idea for some sorts of problems:
struct {
size_t length;
int * elements;
}
Another thing you can think about is how strings in C are null terminated instead of storing a length (as in Pascal). To store a length without worrying about limits need a whopping four bytes, an unimaginably expensive amount (at least back then). One could wonder if arrays could be also null terminated like that but then how would you allow the array to store a null?
The array decays to a pointer when passed.
Section 6.4 of the C FAQ covers this very well and provides the K&R references etc.
That aside, imagine it were possible for the function to know the size of the memory allocated in a pointer. You could call the function two or more times, each time with different input arrays that were potentially different lengths; the length would therefore have to be passed in as a secret hidden variable somehow. And then consider if you passed in an offset into another array, or an array allocated on the heap (malloc and all being library functions - something the compiler links to, rather than sees and reasons about the body of).
Its getting difficult to imagine how this might work without some behind-the-scenes slice objects and such right?
Symbian did have a AllocSize() function that returned the size of an allocation with malloc(); this only worked for the literal pointer returned by the malloc, and you'd get gobbledygook or a crash if you asked it to know the size of an invalid pointer or a pointer offset from one.
You don't want to believe its not possible, but it genuinely isn't. The only way to know the length of something passed into a function is to track the length yourself and pass it in yourself as a separate explicit parameter.
As stated by #Will, the decay happens during the parameter passing. One way to get around it is to pass the number of elements. To add onto this, you may find the _countof() macro useful - it does the equivalent of what you've done ;)
First, a better usage to compute number of elements when the actual array declaration is in scope is:
sizeof array / sizeof array[0]
This way you don't repeat the type name, which of course could change in the declaration and make you end up with an incorrect length computation. This is a typical case of don't repeat yourself.
Second, as a minor point, please note that sizeof is not a function, so the expression above doesn't need any parenthesis around the argument to sizeof.
Third, C doesn't have references so your usage of & in a declaration won't work.
I agree that the proper C solution is to pass the length (using the size_t type) as a separate argument, and use sizeof at the place the call is being made if the argument is a "real" array.
Note that often you work with memory returned by e.g. malloc(), and in those cases you never have a "true" array to compute the size off of, so designing the function to use an element count is more flexible.
Regarding int main():
According to the Standard, argv points to a NULL-terminated array (of pointers to null-terminated strings). (5.1.2.2.1:1).
That is, argv = (char **){ argv[0], ..., argv[argc - 1], 0 };.
Hence, size calculation is performed by a function which is a trivial modification of strlen().
argc is only there to make argv length calculation O(1).
The count-until-NULL method will NOT work for generic array input. You will need to manually specify size as a second argument.
This is a old question, and the OP seems to mix C++ and C in his intends/examples. In C, when you pass a array to a function, it's decayed to pointer. So, there is no way to pass the array size except by using a second argument in your function that stores the array size:
void func(int A[])
// should be instead: void func(int * A, const size_t elemCountInA)
They are very few cases, where you don't need this, like when you're using multidimensional arrays:
void func(int A[3][whatever here]) // That's almost as if read "int* A[3]"
Using the array notation in a function signature is still useful, for the developer, as it might be an help to tell how many elements your functions expects. For example:
void vec_add(float out[3], float in0[3], float in1[3])
is easier to understand than this one (although, nothing prevent accessing the 4th element in the function in both functions):
void vec_add(float * out, float * in0, float * in1)
If you were to use C++, then you can actually capture the array size and get what you expect:
template <size_t N>
void vec_add(float (&out)[N], float (&in0)[N], float (&in1)[N])
{
for (size_t i = 0; i < N; i++)
out[i] = in0[i] + in1[i];
}
In that case, the compiler will ensure that you're not adding a 4D vector with a 2D vector (which is not possible in C without passing the dimension of each dimension as arguments of the function). There will be as many instance of the vec_add function as the number of dimensions used for your vectors.
int arsize(int st1[]) {
int i = 0;
for (i; !(st1[i] & (1 << 30)); i++);
return i;
}
This works for me :)
length of an array(type int) with sizeof:
sizeof(array)/sizeof(int)
Best example is here
thanks #define SIZE 10
void size(int arr[SIZE])
{
printf("size of array is:%d\n",sizeof(arr));
}
int main()
{
int arr[SIZE];
size(arr);
return 0;
}
I am trying to print a dynamic array, but I am having trouble with the bounds for the array.
For a simple example, lets say I'm trying to loop through an array of ints. How can I get the size of the array? I was trying to divide the size of the array by the size of the type like this sizeof(list)/sizeof(int) but that was not working correctly. I understand that I was trying to divide the size of the pointer by the type.
int *list
// Populate list
int i;
for(i = 0; i < ????; i++)
printf("%d", list[i]);
With dynamic arrays you need to maintain a pointer to the beginning address of the array and a value that holds the number of elements in that array. There may be other ways, but this is the easiest way I can think of.
sizeof(list) will also return 4 because the compiler is calculating the size of an integer pointer, not the size of your array, and this will always be four bytes (depending on your compiler).
YOU should know the size of the array, as you are who allocated it.
sizeof is an operator, which means it does its job at compile time. It will give you the size of an object, but not the length of an array.
So, sizeof(int*) is 32/62-bit depending on architecture.
Take a look at std::vector.
There is no standardized method to get the size of allocated memory block. You should keep size of list in unsigned listSize like this:
int *list;
unsigned listSize;
list = malloc(x * sizeof(int));
listSize = x;
If you are coding in C++, then it is better to use STL container like std::vector<>
As you wrote, you really did tried to divide the size of a pointer since list is declared as a pointer, and not an array. In those cases, you should keep the size of the list during the build of it, or finish the list with a special cell, say NULL, or anything else that will not be used in the array.
Seeing some of the inapropriate links to C++ tools for a C question, here is an answer for modern C.
Your ideas of what went wrong are quite correct, as you did it you only have a pointer, no size information about the allocation.
Modern C has variable length arrays (VLA) that you can either use directly or via malloc. Direcly:
int list[n];
and then your idea with the sizeof works out of the box, even if you changed your n in the mean time. This use is to be taken with a bit of care, since this is allocated on the stack. You shouldn't reserve too much, here. For a use with malloc:
int (list*)[n] = malloc(*list);
Then you'd have to adapt your code a bit basically putting a (*list) everywhere you had just list.
If by size you mean the number of elements then you could keep it in a counter that gets a ++ each time you push an element or if you dont mind the lost cycles you could make a function that gets a copy of the pointer to the first location, runs thru the list keeping a counter until it finds a k.next==null. or you could keep a list that as a next and a prev that way you wouldnt care if you lost the beginning.
Hi everyone out there very first thanks to all of you for providing help.
Now i want to know about double pointer. I'm doing code like this:
int main()
{
int **a;
a = (int*)malloc(sizeof(*int)*5);
for (i=0;i<5;i++)
{
a[i] = malloc(sizeof(int)*3);
}
}
Now i dont know if I'm doing it right. How can I put values in this type of array ? Can anybody explain this concept with example ? Thanks in advance.
Well, you have allocated an array equivalent in size to:
int a[5][3];
So to enter values you just do like this:
a[0][0] = 1234;
Which would put a value into the first column of the first row and
a[4][2] = 9999;
would put another value into the last column of the last row.
Since you are using malloc, you should also loop through a[i] from i = 0 to 4, and free(a[i]); and then free(a); or your program will leak memory.
All right... what you have here, basically, is a pointer-pointer, namely, the adress of an adress. You can use this kind of variable when dealing with arrays.
The first two lines of your code are equivalent to :
int* a[5]; // Declaration of an array of 5 integer pointers (a[0] till a[4]).
A "pure" C code doesn't use variable for the size of an array, so you use the malloc when you want to edit dynamically the size of the array.
Meaning, if in your code, you are not going to change the size of your arrays, you are using a very complex way to achieve a very simple goal. You could just type :
int a[5][3];
But if you do not know the size of your array, you have to use the mallocs (and then, free). What you are doing, basically, is :
Declaring an array of array;
Allocating the memory for x number of POINTER to integer arrays;
For each of these POINTERS, allocating memory for y integers.
Now that you have done this, you can use your arrays normally. For instance :
a[1][0] = 1;
will mean : in the first array [1], the first row [0] is 1.
The only difference with a standard declaration like the one above, without the mallocs, is that since you allocated memory, you'll have to free it. Which is why you don't want to lose your variable a**. At the end of your function, the pointer-to-pointer variable will be destroyed, but not the memory you allocated.