I would like to get some help with the following question.
I have a struct Node and I want to change it's insides using some method.
and I want to print the content of the changed struct inside my main method.
how do I get the struct changed and see the changed value in my main without returning the node as a return value.
I guess it might be solved with passing the struct Node as a pointer and then editing it.
what is the right way to do so?
for example:
typedef struct Node{
struct Node * right;
struct Node * left;
void * data;
}Node;
void insert(void * element, Node* root){
if(root==NULL){
root=(Node*)malloc(sizeof(Node));
root->data=element;
}
}
int main(){
Node a;
int b=8;
insert(&b,&a);
printf("%d",*(int*)a.data);
return 0;
}
printf doesn't print 8 it prints 1 (i guess some garbage)
It sounds like you are trying to do the following
Create a struct in one method, say main
Pass it to a second method, say example
Have example modify the struct and have the results visible in main
If so then the way to do this in C is by passing the struct as a pointer to example.
struct Node {
int data;
struct Node* pNext;
};
void example(struct Node* pNode) {
pNode->data = 42;
pNode->pNext = NULL;
}
int main() {
struct Node n;
example(&n);
printf("%d\n", n.data);
}
EDIT
Responding to the updated question.
To see the result of a modification of a Node you must pass a Node*. And accordingly to see the result of a Node* modification you need to pass a Node**. Essentially you need to pass one more level of indirection than the value you want to mutate / return.
void insert(void* element, Node** ppRoot){
if (NULL == *ppRoot) {
Node* pTemp = malloc(sizeof(Node));
pTemp->data = element;
*ppRoot = pTemp;
}
}
Related
typedef struct sTree {
int key;
struct sTree* p;
struct sTree* left;
struct sTree* right;
} sTree;
typedef sTree* tree;
void treeInsert(tree* root);
int main(){
srand((unsigned)time(NULL));
tree *root = NULL;
treeInsert(&root);
return 0;
}
void treeInsert(tree* root){
......
}
I don't understand why I have to pass '&' when calling tree insert (&root instead of root).
I've created a struct representing a node of binary tree and I declared a pointer to the root of the tree as 'tree*'.
So 'root' is double pointer. The function 'treeInsert' expects a double pointer. If I pass simply 'root' it takes the value (NULL) else with the operator '&' it points correctly to the root. The problem is:
passing '&root' I'm not passing a triple pointer? Can someone explain why?
regarding:
treeInsert(&root);
the need for the & is because the function: treeInsert() will need to modify the contents of the pointer. Without the & any assignment to that passed parameter will only change the parameter on the call stack and not the the contents of the parameter in main()
regarding:
tree *root = NULL;
Since tree is already a pointer, this results in (effectively)
tree ** root = NULL;
which will not accomplish what is needed.
A prime example of why a pointer should NOT be hidden in a typedef statement
the following proposed code is clear about what is wanted:
struct sTree
{
int key;
struct sTree* p;
struct sTree* left;
struct sTree* right;
};
typedef struct sTree tree;
void treeInsert(tree** root);
int main( void )
{
srand((unsigned)time(NULL));
tree *root = NULL;
treeInsert(&root);
return 0;
}
void treeInsert(tree** root)
{
tree *localroot = *root; // now 'localroot' is a pointer to the variable `root` in function: `main()`
......
}
I read those about tree in c:
struct node
{
int key_value;
struct node *left;
struct node *right;
};
/* insert a value to tree */
insert(int key, struct node **leaf)
{
if( *leaf == 0 )
{
*leaf = (struct node*) malloc( sizeof( struct node ) );
(*leaf)->key_value = key;
/* initialize the children to null */
(*leaf)->left = 0;
(*leaf)->right = 0;
}
else if(key < (*leaf)->key_value)
{
insert( key, &(*leaf)->left );
}
else if(key > (*leaf)->key_value)
{
insert( key, &(*leaf)->right );
}
}
I can't understand here: insert(int key, struct node **leaf) why two pointers **leaf, does *leaf ok? I am confused when to use two pointers.pls help, thank you very much!
In insert(int key, struct node **leaf) you are Passing the Address pointed by *leaf by C version of "Pass By Reference". And in insert(int key, struct node *leaf) you are passing the Address pointed by *leaf by Pass By Value method.Note C Parameter are always Passed by Value.
So, In This particular Case it doesn't matter if you use insert(int key, struct node **leaf) or insert(int key, struct node *leaf) both will achieve the same outputs.The only difference in this case is that in insert(int key, struct node **leaf) your passing the address by C version of Pass by Reference and in insert(int key, struct node *leaf) your passing the address by Pass By Value method.
Example Code A,
#include<stdio.h>
struct node
{
int data;
};
void AddFive(struct node **t);
int main()
{
struct node *n = NULL;
n = new node;
n->data = 5;
printf("%d\n", n->data);
AddFive(&n);
printf("%d\n", n->data);
return 0;
}
void AddFive(struct node **t)
{
(*t)->data = (*t)->data+5;
}
Example Code B,
#include<stdio.h>
struct node
{
int data;
};
void AddFive(struct node *t);
int main()
{
struct node *n = NULL;
n = new node;
n->data = 5;
printf("%d\n", n->data);
AddFive(n);
printf("%d\n", n->data);
return 0;
}
void AddFive(struct node *t)
{
t->data = t->data+5;
}
If you notice both Code A and Code B achieve the same output.
It is call by reference . if we have to change the value of *leaf then we should have its address thats why we used two *'s when is for pointer of leaf and other to get address of *leaf.
When you want to change the value of a variable defined in main() through some function. Think what do you do. You send the address of that variable and then using that address, change the content of that variable.
Now, in an example cases, the variable is of int type, so sending the address of that variable would mean in the function, you have to receive it in a variable of type int *
void test(int* var) {
*var++;
}
int main() {
int integer = 1;
test(&integer);
printf("%d", integer);
return 0;
}
To change the value of the variable integer you send the address of that to the function test().
Now take this same situation, and think if you need to change the content of a variable which is itself a struct node *. Then you send the address of that variable, and receive it with a (struct node *)*. Thats what is happening in the example you posted.
You want the changes that is to be made to the leaf variable in the insert() fucntion to reflect in the calling function. For this to take place you send the address and change the content accordingly.
C has only pass by value. If pointer to node struct is used as parameter then any modification to passed pointer will not be seen in the caller function. In that case you have to return a pointer from the function insert. Pointer to pointer is used here to update the pointer passed to function insert.
Case 1:
When you are passing a address of a variable then a single pointer is enough to access the variable
Example:
struct node a;
func(&a); // calling
In the func() definition:
func(struct node *a);
Here a points to the address of node. And we can access a using its address directly.
Case 2:
When you are sending the address of pointer variable:
struct node *a;
func(&a); // calling
Then in the function definition it should use a double pointer:
func(struct node **a);
I am creating a code to insert the elements in tree, but tinsert function does not insert; what is wrong with my code? I have checked many times but tree is always NULL.
The code has only 2 functions: one to insert, and second to show it in preorder.
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
struct btree {
int val;
struct btree *left;
struct btree *right;
};
static int c=0;
typedef struct btree node;
void tinsert( node *n,int a)
{
c++;
printf("%d\n",c);
if(n==NULL)
{
n=(node *)malloc(sizeof(node));
n->left=NULL;
n->right=NULL;
n->val=a;
//printf("adding root %d\n",n->val);
//n=temp;
}
else if(a>=(n->val))
tinsert(n->right,a);
else
tinsert(n->left,a);
return ;
}
void preorder_display(node *n)
{
if(n!=NULL)
{
printf("%d\n",n->val);
preorder_display(n->left);
preorder_display(n->right);
}
else
printf("tree is null\n");
}
int main()
{
//int N;
//int num[100];
//int i;
node *ntree=NULL;
tinsert(ntree,4);
tinsert(ntree,6);
tinsert(ntree,8);
tinsert(ntree,1);
printf("tree is \n");
preorder_display(ntree);
return 0;
}
tinsert works on a local copy of your ntree, it doesn't change the one in your main. You can fix it by passing a pointer to it (i.e.: double pointer, pointer to a pointer).
So your tinsert will look like this:
void tinsert( node **n,int a)
And in your main you'll call it like this:
tinsert(&ntree,4);
Of course, you'll need to adjust the code in tinsert to de-reference the pointer and access it correctly.
Or allocate the root node in your main.
you pass your root node ntree to tinsert function by value, so when when the function is done you will stay with original value of ntree which is NULL.
You better rewrite your function, so you will pass pointer to pointer
void tinsert( node **n,int a)
//and invocation is like that :
tinsert(&ntree,4);
when you pass ntree from main to tinsert function,
new copy is created to your node*n;
One way is to make use of pointer to pointer
Or second solution is here:
Here is a solution:
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
struct btree{
int val;
struct btree *left;
struct btree *right;
};
static int c=0;
typedef struct btree node;
node* tinsert( node *n,int a)
{
c++;
printf("%d\n",c);
if(n==NULL)
{
n=(node *)malloc(sizeof(node));
n->left=NULL;
n->right=NULL;
n->val=a;
//printf("adding root %d\n",n->val);
//n=temp;
}
else if(a>=(n->val))
tinsert(n->right,a);
else
tinsert(n->left,a);
return n;
}
void preorder_display(node *n)
{
if(n!=NULL)
{
printf("%d\n",n->val);
preorder_display(n->left);
preorder_display(n->right);
}
else
printf("tree is null\n");
}
int main()
{
//int N;
//int num[100];
//int i;
node *ntree=NULL;
ntree=tinsert(ntree,4);
ntree=tinsert(ntree,6);
ntree=tinsert(ntree,8);
ntree=tinsert(ntree,1);
printf("tree is \n");
preorder_display(ntree);
return 0;
}
C supports the pass by value only. However, this does not prevent you from modifying the value of a variable from another function, because you can always refer to a variable using it's memory; and in C it's done through pointers, an abstraction representing a memory location.
When you pass a value to the function, the value of the actual parameter is copied to the value of formal parameter. Note that a pointer's value is the address it points to. So, this value is copied into the formal parameter. So the new pointer inside the function points to the exact same location your original variable. You can deference the pointer anytime to manipulate it's value.
Here, you are required to manipulate a pointer. So you pass a pointer-to-pointer to the function:
tinsert(&ntree,4);
In your function, you deference it to get your original pointer; like the following:
void tinsert(node **n, int a)
{
//...
*n = malloc(sizeof(node));
//...
}
I want to know the reason why do we use, pointer to pointer while inserting nodes in the binary tree.
But, While traversing the binary tree, we just refer the tree by simple pointer to the root node. But why while inserting node?
Can anyone help me in providing the reason or reference link to understand why it is pointer to pointer .
/*This program clears out all the three methods of traversal */
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
/* Let us basically describe how a particular node looks in the binary tree .... Every node in the tree has three major elements , left child, right child, and and the data. */
struct TreeNode {
int data;
struct TreeNode *leftChild;
struct TreeNode *rightChild;
};
void inorder(struct TreeNode *bt);
void preorder(struct TreeNode *bt);
void postorder(struct TreeNode *bt);
int insert(struct TreeNode **bt,int num);
main()
{
int num,elements;
struct TreeNode *bt;
int i;
printf("Enter number of elements to be inserted in the tree");
scanf("%d",&num);
printf("Enter the elements to be inserted inside the tree");
for(i=0;i<num;i++)
{
scanf("%d",&elements);
insert(&bt,elements);
printf("\n");
}
printf("In Order Traversal \n");
inorder(bt);
printf("Pre Order Traversal \n");
preorder(bt);
printf("Post Order Traversal \n");
postorder(bt);
return 0;
}
int insert(struct TreeNode **bt,int num)
{
if(*bt==NULL)
{
*bt= malloc(sizeof(struct TreeNode));
(*bt)->leftChild=NULL;
(*bt)->data=num;
(*bt)->rightChild=NULL;
return;
}
else{
/* */
if(num < (*bt)->data)
{
insert(&((*bt)->leftChild),num);
}
else
{
insert(&((*bt)->rightChild),num);
}
}
return;
}
void inorder(struct TreeNode *bt){
if(bt!=NULL){
//Process the left node
inorder(bt->leftChild);
/*print the data of the parent node */
//printf(" %d ", bt->data);
/*process the right node */
inorder(bt->rightChild);
}
}
void preorder(struct TreeNode *bt){
if(bt)
{
//Process the parent node first
printf("%d",bt->data);
//Process the left node.
preorder(bt->leftChild);
//Process the right node.
preorder(bt->rightChild);
}
}
void postorder(struct TreeNode *bt){
if(bt)
{
//process the left child
postorder(bt->leftChild);
//process the right child
postorder(bt->rightChild);
//process the parent node
printf("%d",bt->data);
}
}
"I want to know the reason why do we use, pointer to pointer while inserting nodes in the binary tree. But, While traversing the binary tree, we just refer the tree by simple pointer to the root node. But why while inserting node?"
We actually don't even need the code to answer this. If you want to modify (write to) data in an external function in C, you need to have the address of the data. Just like:
main() {
int x = 2;
change_me(x);
printf("%d\n", x); // prints 2
}
void change_me(int x){
x++;
}
has no meaning. You're (in this example) getting a local copy of the vairable, any changes made to the value are only within the local scope. If you want those changes to propagate back to the calling function you need the address:
main() {
int x = 2;
change_me(&x);
printf("%d\n", x); // prints 3
}
void change_me(int* x){
(*x)++;
}
The same applies to pointers. In the example of a linked list, if I want to print the values, I need to traverse the tree and read data. I don't need to change anything so just the pointer will do. However if I want to modify the tree:
struct node{
int val;
sturct node* next;
};
main() {
struct node* head = malloc(sizeof(struct node));
head->val = 3;
insert_a_node_in_front(head);
}
insert_a_node_in_front(node * ptr) {
struct node* temp = ptr;
ptr = malloc(sizeof(struct node));
ptr->val = 5;
ptr->next = temp;
}
Well, guess what? We didn't actually just insert that node because head's value never changed. It's still pointing to the original node with a val==3. The reason is the same as before, we tried to change the value of the local copy of the parameter. If we want those changes to stick it needs the address of the original copy:
insert_a_node_in_front(&head);
}
insert_a_node_in_front(node ** ptr) {
struct node* temp = (*ptr);
(*ptr) = malloc(sizeof(struct node));
(*ptr)->val = 5;
(*ptr)->next = temp;
}
It's because of the first part of insert where it mallocs a new struct treenode. If you only passed in a struct treenode * this would look something like this:
int insert(struct TreeNode *bt,int num)
{
if(bt==NULL)
{
bt= malloc(sizeof(struct TreeNode));
(bt)->leftChild=NULL;
(bt)->data=num;
(bt)->rightChild=NULL;
return;
}
...
}
The problem with that would be that bt is local to insert so the bt in main would be unchanged. So you pass in a pointer to main's bt, which allows insert to change it.
a very good tips on using pointer is given here :
Try this basics : -
http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/how-to-write-functions-that-modify-the-head-pointer-of-a-linked-list/
I'm trying to create a small list for each element in a main list. I have the main list working fine but I don't know how to access and add elements to the small list.
struct smallList
{
char data;
struct smallList *next;
};
struct bigList
{
char data;
struct bigList *next;
struct smallList *head;
} *root;
When I add stuff to the main list, I declare for each new node:
newNode->head = NULL;
I use this function to get the current pointer to an element in main list:
struct bigList *pointer = getPointer(root, value);
Then, to add stuff to its smallList| using that pointer. I pass alongpointer->head` to this function. And its not working.
insert(pointer->head, value)
As WhozCraig suggests, you can resolve your problem using a pointer to a pointer. Something like this:
void insert(struct smallList **head, char value)
{
*head = newSmallList(value, *head);
}
newSmallList would be something like:
struct smallList *newSmallList(char value, struct smallList *rest)
{
struct smallList *result = malloc(sizeof(struct smallList));
result->next = rest;
result->data = value;
return result;
}
The problem with your current setup is that you are passing the value of the pointer->head field (which happens to be null) to the function, when what you want is to alter what is stored in the field. Here is a program using integers that illustrates a similar mistake:
void setFive(int i)
{
i = 5;
}
int main(void)
{
int myInt = 7;
setFive(myInt);
printf("%d\n", myInt); /* still 7! */
return 0;
}