Would this be the proper way to extend a structure array?
typedef struct { int x,y,z;} student_record;
int main(){
student_record data_record[30]; // create array of 30 student_records
num_of_new_records = 5;
data_record = realloc(data_record,(sizeof(data_record) + (sizeof(student_record)*num_of_new_records)));
// do I now have an array of 35 student_records???
No - you can't assign to an array. Your code won't even compile - did you try it?
If you want to realloc() you need to have used malloc() (or one of its relatives):
student_record *data_record = malloc(sizeof(student_record) * 30);
You probably shouldn't be assigning the return value of realloc() back to the original variable, either. If it fails for some reason, you'll lose the original pointer and leak that memory.
You should follow the pattern of calloc'ing the initial size and then using realloc when necessary. Safe practice for realloc'ing need to include assigning the initial value returned to a temporary variable and over-writing the first after verifying that there are no errors. Something like this:
student_record *data_record = malloc(sizeof(student_record) * 30);
student_record *tmp;
// need larger size
if ((tmp = realloc(data_record, new_size)) == NULL)
perror(); //possibly exit as well since you're out of memory
else
data_record = tmp;
You can only use realloc on objects that are on heap (dynamically allocated) thus you have to malloc first.
typedef struct { int x,y,z;} student_record;
int main()
{
student_record *data_record = malloc(sizeof(student_record)*30);
assert(data_rocord);
data_record = realloc(data_record, sizeof(student_record)*35);
assert(data_record);
free(data_record);
exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
}
Related
I'm trying to implement the first part of an autocomplete feature that takes in a string, calculates an index for a particular letter, and then allocates another struct pointer at that index. It also stores possible completions of words in a string array. For some reason, the program crashes when I try to access the string array field, and I can't figure out why. How can I fix this?
Thanks
struct table {
struct table *next[26];
char **complete;
int lastIndex;
int size;
};
static struct table Base={{NULL},NULL,0,0};
void insert(const char *string){
int index=string[0]-'a';
if(Base.next[index]==NULL){
Base.next[index]=(struct table*)malloc(sizeof(struct table));
*Base.next[index]=(struct table){{NULL},NULL,0,0};
}
struct table *pointer=Base.next[index];
if(pointer->lastIndex==pointer->size){ //expand complete array
pointer->complete[pointer->lastIndex] = strdup(string); //program crashes here
pointer->lastIndex=pointer->lastIndex+1;
}
}
The crash in this line
pointer->complete[pointer->lastIndex] = strdup(string);
is because pointer->complete is NULL. In other words, you forgot to allocate memory for complete.
How can I fix this?
You must allocate memory. It seems that you want a dynamic sized array of char pointers. So you'll need to use realloc so that you both extend the allocated memory and preserve previous values.
Something like:
char** tmp = realloc(pointer->complete, (pointer->lastIndex + 1) * sizeof(char*));
if (tmp == NULL)
{
// Out of memory
exit(1);
}
pointer->complete = tmp;
// Then you can do your normal code
pointer->complete[pointer->lastIndex] = strdup(string);
Notice: Though it's possible to use realloc every time you insert a string, it may perform rather bad.
So instead of reallocating memory for every new string, it may be better to reallocate a chunk of memory each time you call realloc. Like:
if (pointer->lastIndex == pointer->size)
{
// Need more memory
// - if it's the first time just start with 10 (or another number)
// - else double the size
pointer->size = (pointer->size != 0) ? 2 * pointer->size : 10;
char** tmp = realloc(pointer->complete, (pointer->size) * sizeof(char*));
if (tmp == NULL)
{
// Out of memory
exit(1);
}
pointer->complete = tmp;
}
Here I decided to double the allocated memory when doing realloc. You can of cause use ant approach you like instead, e.g. always add 10 more instead of doubling.
BTW: The name lastIndex seems poor as it's really a nextIndex variable.
A final word on data structure
Your data structur, i.e. struct table seems a bit strange to me. At base-level, you only use table. At the next level you don't use table but only the other variables.
Seems to me that you should split up the struct into two structs like:
struct StringTable {
char **complete;
int lastIndex;
int size;
};
struct table {
struct StringTable strings[26];
};
That would save you both memory and some of the dynamic memory allocation.
You are assuming that
const char * string
will contain only small case alphabets. Dictionaries also have apostrophes
add that case.
So I have this struct
#define MAX 128
typedef struct this_struct {
Type items[MAX];
} *SVar;
Lets say we create something like this
SVar first = malloc(sizeof(struct this_struct));
Now when I push values into the array and it fills to the MAX which is 128, I need to dynamically create a new array but I don't know how since the array is inside.
Here are my current thoughts on how I want to do it:
Create a new SVar names "second" with second->items[MAX *2]
free(first)
How can I go about doing this?
The typical way to do that is make your struct contain three values: first, a pointer to an array of variables, and second a count of the currently allocated array size, and in practice, you will need a third item to track the number of array slots you're actually using.
So, with your struct, it would be something like this:
Type *items;
int item_length; /* Number allocated */
int item_count; /* Number in use */
you initially allocate a "batch" of entries, say 100:
first = malloc(sizeof(this_struct));
first->items = malloc(sizeof(Type) * 100);
first->item_length = 100;
first->item_count = 0;
Then you add items one at a time. Simplistically, it's this:
first->items[first->item_count] = new_item;
first->item_count += 1;
But really you need to make sure each time you're not going to overflow the currently-allocated space, so it's really like this:
if (first->item_count == first->item_length) {
first->item_length += 100;
first->items = realloc(first->items, sizeof(Type) * first->item_length);
}
first->items[first->item_count] = new_item;
first->item_count += 1;
You're basically just using slots one at a time as long as your currently allocated space is large enough. Once you've used all the space you've allocated, realloc will either extend the array in place if there is room in the address space, or it will find and allocate a new larger space and move all the existing data to the new spot (and freeing up the old space).
In practice, you should check the return valueon the malloc and realloc calls.
A usual trick is to do something like this:
typedef struct {
int max_items; /* enough memory allocated for so many items */
...
Whatever_type items[1]; /* must be the last member */
} Dyn_array;
...
int n = 127;
Dyn_array *p = malloc(sizeof(Dyn_array) + n*sizeof(p.items[0]);
p->max_items = n + 1;
...
n = 1023;
p = realloc(p, sizeof(Dyn_array) + n*sizeof(p.items[0]);
p->max_items = n + 1;
and so on. The code using the structure performs out-of-bound reads and writes to the items array, which is declared to store one item only. This is OK, however, since C does not do any bounds checking, and the memory allocation policy must guarantee that there is always enough space available for num_items items.
I am working on an assignment and ran into challenging problem. As far as I'm concerned and from what I've learnt the code that follows should be correct however it does not work. Basically what I am trying to is copy a string value into the variable member of a structure the is part of an array passed into a method as a pointer. What am I missing?
typedef struct
{
char * name; //variable in struct I am trying to access
} Struct;
void foo(Struct * arr) //array of Structs passed into function as a pointer
{
int i = 0;
while(i++ < 2)
{
arr[i].name = malloc(sizeof(char *)); //assigning memory to variable in each Struct
arr[i].name = strdup("name"); //copying "name" to variable in each Struct
printf("C - %s\n", arr[i].name); //printing out name variable in each Struct
}
}
main()
{
Struct * arr; //defining pointer
arr = calloc(2, sizeof(Struct)); //allocating memory so pointer can hold 2 Structs
foo(arr); //calling function foo passing pointer into function
return 0;
}
This code compiles and runs however it does not do what it is designed to do. Forgive me if it is something trivial. I am new to the language C
Two issues:
while(i++ < 2) This line changes the value of i as soon as it checks it, so your loop body will not be the same as it was checked.
arr[i].name = strdup("name"); overwrites the value of the .name pointer, causing a memory leak of the memory you malloc()'ed earlier.
Extending on 2 pointed out correctly already,
arr[i].name = strdup("name");
Even if you use following instead of above,
strcpy(array[i].name, "name");
you haven't allocated enough bytes to store the string i.e. this is wrong
arr[i].name = malloc(sizeof(char *));
// even if pointer is 8 byte here, concept isn't right
Should be something like
arr[i].name = malloc(strlen("name")+1);
// or MAX_SIZE where it is greater than the possible "name".
Or better yet, remove the malloc at all, strdup takes care of allocation itself
This is not answering your question directly, but addresses an issue to big to put into a comment...
Additional issue: You probably did not intend to allocate only a (char *) worth of memory to a variable intended to hold at least "name". Change;
arr[i].name = malloc(sizeof(char *));
to:
arr[i].name = malloc(sizeof(char)*strlen("name")+1); //+1 for '\0'
or better yet, use char *name="name";, then:
arr[i].name = malloc(sizeof(char)*strlen(name)+1);
Even more general (and better):
char *name;
name = malloc(strlen(someInputString)+1);
//do stuff with name...
free(name);
Now, you can allocate name to any length needed based on the length of someInputString.
[EDIT]
Etienz, I wanted to address one more thing, alluded to by #H2CO3 above, but not really explained, that I think might be useful to you:
Regarding your desire to have room for two structs, because you typedef'd your struct, you can simply do something like this: (but I am going to change the name you used from Struct to NAME :) The whole point being that when a struct is created as an array, you do not need to use calloc or malloc to create space for them, it is done as shown below...
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
typedef struct{
char *name;
}NAME;
//use new variable type NAME to create global variables:
NAME n[2], *pN; //2 copies AND pointer created here
//prototype func
int func(NAME *a);
int main()
{
pN = &n[0]; //pointer initialized here
func(pN); //pointer used here (no malloc or calloc)
printf("name1 is %s\nname 2 is %s", pN[0].name, pN[1].name);
return 0;
}
int func(NAME *a)
{
char namme1[]="andrew";
char namme2[]="billebong";
//You DO have to allocate the members though
a[0].name = malloc(strlen(namme1)+1);
a[1].name = malloc(strlen(namme2)+1);
strcpy(a[0].name, namme1);
strcpy(a[1].name, namme2);
return 0;
}
I'm making my library, and just when I thought understanding the pointers syntax, I just get confused, search on the web and get even more confused.
Basically I want to make a pool, here is what I actually want to do:
the following points must be respected :
when I add an object to the pool, the pointers of the current array to the objects are
added to a new array of pointers + 1 (to contain the new object).
the new array is pointed by "objects" of my foo structure.
the old array is free'ing.
when I call the cleanup function, all the object in the pool are
free'd
How should I define my structure ?
typedef struct {
int n;
(???)objects
} foo;
foo *the_pool;
here's the code to manage my pool :
void myc_pool_init ()
{
the_pool = (???)malloc(sizeof(???));
the_pool->n = 0;
the_pool->objects = NULL;
}
void myc_push_in_pool (void* object)
{
if (object != NULL) {
int i;
(???)new_pointers;
the_pool->n++;
new_pointers = (???)malloc(sizeof(???)*the_pool->n);
for (i = 0; i < the_pool->n - 1; ++i) {
new_pointers[i] = (the_pool->objects)[i]; // that doesn't work (as I'm not sure how to handle it)
}
new_array[i] = object;
free(the_pool->objects);
the_pool->objects = new_array; // that must be wrong
}
}
void myc_pool_cleanup ()
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < the_pool->n; ++i)
free((the_pool->objects)[i]); // as in myc_push_in_pool, it doesn't work
free(the_pool->objects);
free(the_pool);
}
Note: the type of objects added to the pool are not known in advance, so i should handles all pointers as void
any feedback would be very welcomed.
A straight answer to your question would be: use void *. This type is very powerful as it allows you to put any kind of pointer in your pool. However, it's up to you to do the correct casts when retrieving a void * pointer from your pool.
Your struct would look like this
typedef struct {
int n;
(void **)objects
} foo;
foo *the_pool;
As in, an array of pointers.
Your malloc:
new_pointers = (void **)malloc(sizeof(void *)*the_pool->n);
There is an performance issue here. You could simply allocate an array of a fixed size, and only reallocate if the number of elements exceeds a predefined load factor (= number used/ max size)
Also, instead of allocating a new pointer each time you add something to your pool, you could just use realloc (http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/cstdlib/realloc/)
the_pool->objects = (void **)realloc(the_pool->objects, the_pool->n* sizeof(void*));
Realloc tries to increase the current allocated area, without the need to copy everything. Only if the function cannot increase the allocated area contiguously will it allocate a new area and copy everything.
Firstly, you already answered your "What should the type of foo.objects be?" question: void *objects;, malloc already returns void *. Your struct needs to store the size_t item_size;, too. n should probably also be a size_t.
typedef struct {
size_t item_count;
size_t item_size;
void *objects;
} foo;
foo *the_pool;
You could use a home-grown loop, but I'd consider memcpy to be a more convenient way to copy your old items to your new space, and the new item to it's new space.
Dereferencing a void * is a constraint violation, as is pointer arithmetic on a void *, so new_pointers will need to be a different type. You need a type that points to objects of the right size. You could use an array of the right number of unsigned char, like so:
// new_pointers is a pointer to array of the_pool->item_size unsigned chars.
unsigned char (*new_pointers)[the_pool->item_size] = malloc(the_pool->item_count * sizeof *new_pointers);
// copy the old items
memcpy(new_pointers, the_pool->objects, the_pool->item_count * sizeof *new_pointers);
// copy the new items
memcpy(new_pointers + the_pool->item_count, object, sizeof *new_pointers);
Remember, free() is only for pointers returned by malloc(), and there should be a one-to-one correspondence: Each malloc() should be free()d. Look how you malloc: new_pointers = malloc(sizeof(???)*the_pool->n); ... What makes you think you need a loop (in myc_pool_cleanup) to free each item, when you can free them all in one foul swoop?
You could use realloc, but you otherwise seem to be handling malloc/memcpy/free *in myc_push_in_pool* flawlessly. Lots of people tend to mess up when writing realloc code.
About C structs and pointers...
Yesterday I wrote sort of the following code (try to memorize parts of it out of my memory):
typedef struct {
unsigned short int iFrames;
unsigned short int* iTime; // array with elements [0..x] holding the timing for each frame
} Tile;
Tile* loadTile(char* sFile)
{
// expecting to declare enough space for one complete Tile structure, of which the base memory address is stored in the tmpResult pointer
Tile* tmpResult = malloc(sizeof(Tile));
// do things that set values to the Tile entity
// ...
// return the pointer for further use
return tmpResult;
}
void main()
{
// define a tile pointer and set its value to the returned pointer (this should also be allowed in one row)
// Expected to receive the VALUE of the pointer - i.e. the base memory address at where malloc made space available
Tile* tmpTile;
tmpTile = loadTile("tile1.dat");
// get/set elements of the tile
// ...
// free the tile
free(tmpTile);
}
What I see: I cán use the malloced Tile structure inside the function, but once I try to access it in Main, I get an error from Visual Studio about the heap (which tells me that something is freed after the call is returned).
If I change it so that I malloc space in Main, and pass the pointer to this space to the loadTile function as an argument (so that the function does no longer return anything) then it does work but I am confident that I should also be able do let the loadTile function malloc the space and return a pointer to that space right?!
Thanks!!
There's nothing wrong with what you're trying to do, or at least not from the code here. However, I'm concerned about this line:
unsigned short int* iTime; // array with elements [0..x] holding the timing for each frame
That isn't true unless you're also mallocing iTime somewhere:
Tile* tmpResult = malloc(sizeof(Tile));
tmpResult->iTime = malloc(sizeof(short) * n);
You will need to free it when you clean up:
free(tmpTile->iTime);
free(tmpTile);
You are probably writing over memory you don't own. I guess that in this section:
// do things that set values to the Tile entity
you're doing this:
tmpResult->iFrames = n;
for (i = 0 ; i < n ; ++n)
{
tmpResult->iTime [i] = <some value>;
}
which is wrong, you need to allocate separate memory for the array:
tmpResult->iTime = malloc (sizeof (short int) * n);
before writing to it. This make freeing the object more complex:
free (tile->iTime);
free (tile);
Alternatively, do this:
typedef struct {
unsigned short int iFrames;
unsigned short int iTime [1]; // array with elements [0..x] holding the timing for each frame
} Tile;
and malloc like this:
tile = malloc (sizeof (Tile) + sizeof (short int) * (n - 1)); // -1 since Tile already has one int defined.
and the for loop remains the same:
for (i = 0 ; i < n ; ++n)
{
tmpResult->iTime [i] = <some value>;
}
but freeing the tile is then just:
free (tile);
as you've only allocated one chunk of memory, not two. This works because C (and C++) does not do range checking on arrays.
You code, with as little changes as I could live with, works for me:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
unsigned short int iFrames;
unsigned short int* iTime;
} Tile;
Tile *loadTile(char* sFile) {
Tile *tmpResult = malloc(sizeof *tmpResult);
if (!tmpResult) return NULL;
/* do things that set values to the Tile entity */
/* note that iTime is uninitialized */
tmpResult->iFrames = 42;
(void)sFile; /* used parameter */
return tmpResult;
}
int main(void) {
Tile* tmpTile;
tmpTile = loadTile("tile1.dat");
if (!tmpTile) return 1;
printf("value: %d\n", tmpTile->iFrames);
free(tmpTile);
return 0;
}
The code you showed looks OK, the error must be in the elided code.
Whatever problem you are having, it is not in the code shown in this question. Make sure you are not clobbering the pointer before returning it.
This should work fine... could just be a warning from VisualStudio that you are freeing a pointer in a different function than it was malloced in.
Technically, your code will work on a C compiler. However, allocating dynamically inside functions and returning pointers to the allocated data is an excellent way of creating memory leaks - therefore it is very bad programming practice. A better way is to allocate the memory in the caller (main in this case). The code unit allocating the memory should be the same one that frees it.
Btw if this is a Windows program, main() must be declared to return int, or the code will not compile on a C compiler.