If I have an array like this:
2, 4, 6, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
Is there a way I can use qsort by sorting just the first 3 elements, and leaving the rest untouched?
Would qsort(arrNumbers, 3, sizeof(int), compare) do the job?
Does specifying the number of elements lower than the full array cause only that number of elements to become sorted?
EDIT:
My compare function is:
int comp(const int * a, const int * b)
if(a==b)
{
return 0;
}
else
{
if(a<b)
{
return -1;
}
else
{
return 1;
}
}
Does it seem right?
Yes.
Yes.*
Yes.
* Assuming you define compare() appropriately.
Why don't you try it and see that it works as you expect?
Explanation: the qsort function only gets a pointer to the array, which does not say how long the array is. That's why you have to pass the size as well. In your function call you claim that the array is three ints long, and that's all the qsort function can be sure of. It will not access anything beyond that limit.
The full signature is:
void qsort(
void * base,
size_t num,
size_t width,
int (__cdecl *compare )(const void *, const void *)
);
To sort a specific contiguous range of the array, you just pass in a different base (pointer to starting element for the range) and num (number of elements in the range).
Yes if you specify 3 in your case it will only sort the first 3 elements.
Related
I already have a list of strings read in from a text file into a 2D array named word ready to be sorted.
The list looks like:
I
like
cherry
pie
and
chocolate
pie
I want the list to look like this after sorted:
and
cherry
chocolate
I
like
pie
pie
The function prototype is below. int counter is the amount of strings, and MAX_CHAR_LEN = 1024 in case you were wondering.
void alphabetize(char word[][MAX_CHAR_LEN], int counter)
{
return;
}
Notice that sorting by the first character alone is not sufficient, as the list contains two strings that start with "ch"
Can someone provide a function that can do this? Thanks in advance.
You want to use the qsort() function.
qsort(base, num_of_elements, element_size, my_compare);
The comparison function my_compare takes two arguments, each a const void *, and returns a number indicating the relative order of the arguments. A negative number means the first argument is before the second argument. A positive number means the first argument is after the second argument. A zero is returned if the arguments have compared to be equal.
As your string comparison is case insensitive, you will need to create your own comparison function, or find one provided to you by your system that is not part of the C library proper. POSIX provides strcasecmp() for this purpose (Google tells me that _stricmp() is available on Windows).
int my_compare (const void *a, const void *b) {
return strcasecmp(a, b);
}
Defining the comparison function is usually the trickiest part of using qsort(). You have to understand the context of the pointers that are being passed into that function. When an array of TYPE is passed into qsort(), it will pass a pointer to const TYPE to each argument of the comparison function.
In your case, you would be passing in an array of array of MAX_CHAR_LEN chars. So, each argument to the comparison function is a pointer to const array of MAX_CHAR_LEN chars. This means that technically, the my_compare function should be written like this:
int my_compare (const void *a, const void *b) {
typedef char TYPE[MAX_CHAR_LEN];
const TYPE *aa = (const TYPE *)a;
const TYPE *bb = (const TYPE *)b;
return strcasecmp(*aa, *bb);
}
The cast on the arguments would normally not be necessary, except that C doesn't really support the notion of a constant array. It converts such a thing into an array of constants, so the cast is required to reflect that.
However, the address of an array is equal to the address of its first element. That is, for the code above, the following assertions would be true:
assert(aa == (const void *)*aa);
assert(bb == (const void *)*bb);
So, because the dereference of a pointer to an array equals the decayed address value of the same array, the first implementation of my_compare() is sufficient for your 2-D array.
You can use the qsort function to sort. You also need to create a compare function that compares two arrays of chars, and then pass that function pointer as an argument.
Example that sorts ints:
/* qsort example */
#include <stdio.h> /* printf */
#include <stdlib.h> /* qsort */
int values[] = { 40, 10, 100, 90, 20, 25 };
int compare (const void * a, const void * b)
{
return ( *(int*)a - *(int*)b );
}
int main ()
{
int n;
qsort (values, 6, sizeof(int), compare);
for (n=0; n<6; n++)
printf ("%d ",values[n]);
return 0;
}
The above code can easily be adapted to sort arrays of chars instead of ints.
If you want to write your own sort function, something like this is pretty straight forward.
for (int i = 0; i < array.size(); i++)
{
for (int j = i+1; j < array.size(); j++)
{
if (array[i] > array[j])
swap(array[i],array[j]);
}
}
qsort is Good Option. See it's detail here
You can also try Bubble Sort. It's implementation in C is easy - See this Good answer for help
I have an int array and I need to find the number of elements in it. I know it has something to do with sizeof but I'm not sure how to use it exactly.
If you have your array in scope you can use sizeof to determine its size in bytes and use the division to calculate the number of elements:
#define NUM_OF_ELEMS 10
int arr[NUM_OF_ELEMS];
size_t NumberOfElements = sizeof(arr)/sizeof(arr[0]);
If you receive an array as a function argument or allocate an array in heap you can not determine its size using the sizeof. You'll have to store/pass the size information somehow to be able to use it:
void DoSomethingWithArray(int* arr, int NumOfElems)
{
for(int i = 0; i < NumOfElems; ++i) {
arr[i] = /*...*/
}
}
int a[20];
int length;
length = sizeof(a) / sizeof(int);
and you can use another way to make your code not be hard-coded to int
Say if you have an array array
you just need to:
int len = sizeof(array) / sizeof(array[0]);
I personally think that sizeof(a) / sizeof(*a) looks cleaner.
I also prefer to define it as a macro:
#define NUM(a) (sizeof(a) / sizeof(*a))
Then you can use it in for-loops, thusly:
for (i = 0; i < NUM(a); i++)
It is not possible to find the number of elements in an array unless it is a character array. Consider the below example:
int main()
{
int arr[100]={1,2,3,4,5};
int size = sizeof(arr)/sizeof(arr[0]);
printf("%d", size);
return 1;
}
The above value gives us value 100 even if the number of elements is five.
If it is a character array, you can search linearly for the null string at the end of the array and increase the counter as you go through.
In real we can't count how many elements are store in array
But you can find the array length or size using sizeof operator.
But why we can't find how many elements are present in my array.
Because when we initialise an array compiler give memory on our program like a[10] (10 blocks of 4 size) and every block has garbage value if we put some value in some index like a[0]=1,a[1]=2,a[3]=8; and other block has garbage value no one can tell which value is garbage and which value is not garbage that's a reason we cannot calculate how many elements in an array. I hope this will help you to understand. Little concept
Super easy.
Just divide the number of allocated bytes by the number of bytes of the array's data type using sizeof().
For example, given an integer array called myArray
int numArrElements = sizeof(myArray) / sizeof(int);
Now, if the data type of your array isn't constant and could possibly change, then make the divisor in the equation use the size of the first value as the size of the data type.
For example:
int numArrElements = sizeof(myArray) / sizeof(myArray[0]);
This way, the code is type agnostic and will function correctly no matter the data type of the array.
I used following code as suggested above to evaluate number of elements in my 2-dimensional array:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
void main(void)
{
char strs[3][20] =
{
{"January"},
{"February"},
{""}
};
int arraysize = sizeof(strs)/sizeof(strs[0]);
for (int i = 0; i < arraysize; i++)
{
printf("Month %d is: %s\n", i, strs[i]);
}
}
It works nicely. As far as I know you can't mix up different data types in C arrays and also you should have the same size of all array elements (if I am right), therefore you can take advantage of that with this little trick:
count number of bytes with sizeof() function from whole 2d array (in this case 3*20 = 60 bytes)
count number of bytes with sizeof() function from first array element strs[0] (in this case 20 bytes)
divide whole size with size of one element what will give you number of elements
This snipped should be portable for 2d arrays in C however in other programming languages it could not work because you can use different data types within array with different sizes (like in JAVA).
The question is simple: given a C++ array (e.g. x as in int x[10]), how would you get the number of elements in it?
An obvious solution is the following macro (definition 1):
#define countof( array ) ( sizeof( array )/sizeof( array[0] ) )
I cannot say this isn’t correct, because it does give the right answer when you give it an array. However, the same expression gives you something bogus when you supply something that is not an array. For example, if you have
int * p;
then countof( p ) always give you 1 on a machine where an int pointer and an int have the same size (e.g. on a Win32 platform).
This macro also wrongfully accepts any object of a class that has a member function operator[]. For example, suppose you write
class IntArray {
private:
int * p;
size_t size;
public:
int & operator [] ( size_t i );
} x;
then sizeof( x ) will be the size of the x object, not the size of the buffer pointed to by x.p. Therefore you won’t get a correct answer by countof( x ).
So we conclude that definition 1 is not good because the compiler does not prevent you from misusing it. It fails to enforce that only an array can be passed in.
What is a better option?
Well, if we want the compiler to ensure that the parameter to countof is always an array, we have to find a context where only an array is allowed. The same context should reject any non-array expression.
Some beginners may try this (definition 2):
template <typename T, size_t N>
size_t countof( T array[N] )
{
return N;
}
They figure, this template function will accept an array of N elements and return N.
Unfortunately, this doesn’t compile because C++ treats an array parameter the same as a pointer parameter, i.e. the above definition is equivalent to:
template <typename T, size_t N>
size_t countof( T * array )
{
return N;
}
It now becomes obvious that the function body has no way of knowing what N is.
However, if a function expects an array reference, then the compiler does make sure that the size of the actual parameter matches the declaration. This means we can make definition 2 work with a minor modification (definition 3):
template <typename T, size_t N>
size_t countof( T (&array)[N] )
{
return N;
}
This countof works very well and you cannot fool it by giving it a pointer. However, it is a function, not a macro. This means you cannot use it where a compile time constant is expected. In particular, you cannot write something like:
int x[10];
int y[ 2*countof(x) ]; // twice as big as x
Can we do anything about it?
Someone (I don’t know who it is – I just saw it in a piece of code from an unknown author) came up with a clever idea: moving N from the body of the function to the return type (e.g. make the function return an array of N elements), then we can get the value of N without actually calling the function.
To be precise, we have to make the function return an array reference, as C++ does not allow you to return an array directly.
The implementation of this is:
template <typename T, size_t N>
char ( &_ArraySizeHelper( T (&array)[N] ))[N];
#define countof( array ) (sizeof( _ArraySizeHelper( array ) ))
Admittedly, the syntax looks awful. Indeed, some explanation is necessary.
First, the top-level stuff
char ( &_ArraySizeHelper( ... ))[N];
says _ArraySizeHelper is a function that returns a reference (note the &) to a char array of N elements.
Next, the function parameter is
T (&array)[N]
which is a reference to a T array of N elements.
Finally, countof is defined as the size of the result of the function _ArraySizeHelper. Note we don’t even need to define _ArraySizeHelper(), -- a declaration is enough.
With this new definition,
int x[10];
int y[ 2*countof(x) ]; // twice as big as x
becomes valid, just as we desire.
Am I happy now? Well, I think this definition is definitely better than the others we have visited, but it is still not quite what I want. For one thing, it doesn’t work with types defined inside a function. That’s because the template function _ArraySizeHelper expects a type that is accessible in the global scope.
I don’t have a better solution. If you know one, please let me know.
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
int arr[]={10,20,30,40,50,60};
int *p;
int count=0;
for(p=arr;p<&arr+1;p++)
count++;
printf("The no of elements in array=%d",count);
return 0;
}
OUTPUT=6
EXPLANATION
p is a pointer to a 1-D array, and in the loop for(p=arr,p<&arr+1;p++)
I made p point to the base address. Suppose its base address is 1000; if we increment p then it points to 1002 and so on. Now coming to the concept of &arr - It basically represents the whole array, and if we add 1 to the whole array i.e. &arr+1, it gives the address 1012 i.e. the address of next 1-D array (in our case the size of int is 2), so the condition becomes 1000<1012.
So, basically the condition becomes
for(p=1000;p<1012;p++)
And now let's check the condition and count the value
1st time p=1000 and p<1012 condition is true: enter in the loop, increment the value of count to 1.
2nd time p=1002 and p<1012 condition is true: enter in the loop, increment the value of count to 2.
...
6th time p=1010 and p<1012 condition is true: enter in the loop, increment the value of count to 6.
Last time p=1012 and p<1012 condition is false: print the value of count=6 in printf statement.
sizeof returns the size in bytes of it's argument. This is not what you want, but it can help.
Let's say you have an array:
int array[4];
If you apply sizeof to the array (sizeof(array)), it will return its size in bytes, which in this case is 4 * the size of an int, so a total of maybe 16 bytes (depending on your implementation).
If you apply sizeof to an element of the array (sizeof(array[0])), it will return its size in bytes, which in this case is the size of an int, so a total of maybe 4 bytes (depending on your implementation).
If you divide the first one by the second one, it will be: (4 * the size of an int) / (the size of an int) = 4; That's exactly what you wanted.
So this should do:
sizeof(array) / sizeof(array[0])
Now you would probably like to have a macro to encapsulate this logic and never have to think again how it should be done:
#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0]))
You need the parentheses enclosing all the macro as in any other complex macro, and also enclosing every variable, just to avoid unexpected bugs related to operators precedence.
Now you can use it on any array like this:
int array[6];
ptrdiff_t nmemb;
nmemb = ARRAY_SIZE(array);
/* nmemb == 6 */
Remember that arguments of functions declared as arrays are not really arrays, but pointers to the first element of the array, so this will NOT work on them:
void foo(int false_array[6])
{
ptrdiff_t nmemb;
nmemb = ARRAY_SIZE(false_array);
/* nmemb == sizeof(int *) / sizeof(int) */
/* (maybe ==2) */
}
But it can be used in functions if you pass a pointer to an array instead of just the array:
void bar(int (*arrptr)[7])
{
ptrdiff_t nmemb;
nmemb = ARRAY_SIZE(*arrptr);
/* nmemb == 7 */
}
void numel(int array1[100][100])
{
int count=0;
for(int i=0;i<100;i++)
{
for(int j=0;j<100;j++)
{
if(array1[i][j]!='\0')
{
count++;
//printf("\n%d-%d",array1[i][j],count);
}
else
break;
}
}
printf("Number of elements=%d",count);
}
int main()
{
int r,arr[100][100]={0},c;
printf("Enter the no. of rows: ");
scanf("%d",&r);
printf("\nEnter the no. of columns: ");
scanf("%d",&c);
printf("\nEnter the elements: ");
for(int i=0;i<r;i++)
{
for(int j=0;j<c;j++)
{
scanf("%d",&arr[i][j]);
}
}
numel(arr);
}
This shows the exact number of elements in matrix irrespective of the array size you mentioned while initilasing(IF that's what you meant)
we can find number of elements in array only if array is declared in this format
int a[]={1,2,3,4,5,6};
number of element in array is
n=sizeof(a) / sizeof(a[0]);
we should no able to calculate array size if it is declared like this int a[10]={1,2,3,4,5,6}
i mostly found a easy way to execute the length of array inside a loop just like that
int array[] = {10, 20, 30, 40};
int i;
for (i = 0; i < array[i]; i++) {
printf("%d\n", array[i]);
}
If we don't know the number of elements in the array and when the input is given by the user at the run time. Then we can write the code as
C CODE:
while(scanf("%d",&array[count])==1) {
count++;
}
C++ CODE:
while(cin>>a[count]) {
count++;
}
Now the count will be having the count of number of array elements which are entered.
Assuming you have an array with elements 1,3,4.
To know its length, you'd need to use the sizeof function as follows:
int myArray[] = {1,3,4};
int len = sizeof(myArray) / sizeof(myArray[0]);
You can check the number of elements by printing the output as follows:
cout<<"This array has " << len << " elements";
The full program would be as follows:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int myArray[] = {1,3,4};
int len = sizeof(myArray) / sizeof(myArray[0]);
cout<<"The array has " << len << "elements";
return 0;
}
Actually, there is no proper way to count the elements in a dynamic integer array. However, the sizeof command works properly in Linux, but it does not work properly in Windows. From a programmer's point of view, it is not recommended to use sizeof to take the number of elements in a dynamic array. We should keep track of the number of elements when making the array.
I have an array/pointer related problem.
I created an int array myArray of size 3. Using a function I want to fill this array.
So I'm calling this function giving her the adress &myArray of the array.
Is the syntax correct for the function declaration`? I'm handing over the pointer to the array, so the function can fill the array elements one by one.
But somehow my array is not filled with the correct values.
In Java I could just give an array to a method and have an array returned.
Any help is appreciated! Thanks!
#include <stdio.h>
int myArray[3];
void getSmth(int *anArray[]);
int main(void)
{
getSmth(&myArray);
}
void getSmth(int *anArray[])
{
for(i=0...)
{
*anArray[i] = tmpVal[i];
}
}
Remove one level of indirection:
#include <stdio.h>
int myArray[3];
void getSmth(int anArray[]);
int main(void)
{
getSmth(myArray);
}
void getSmth(int anArray[])
{
for(i=0...)
{
anArray[i] = tmpVal[i];
}
}
Also, as others have suggested, it would be a good idea to pass the size of the array into getSmth().
No, the syntax is not correct. You have an extra *, making the argument into an array of pointers.
In general, it's better to use:
void getSmth(int *array, size_t length);
since then the function can work on data from more sources, and the length becomes available which is very handy for iterating over the data as you seem to want to be doing.
You'd then call it like so:
int main(void)
{
int a[12], b[53];
getSmth(a, sizeof a / sizeof a[0]);
getSmth(b, sizeof b / sizeof b[0]);
}
Note the use of sizeof to compute (at compile-time) the number of elements. This is better than repeating the numbers from the definitions of the variables.
Right now, your function accepts an int *anArray[] parameter, which is an array of pointers to int. Remove the unneccessary * and your function signature should look simply like this:
void getSmth(int anArray[]); // array of int
or
void getSmth(int *anArray); // pointer to first array element of type int
You should use either int anArray[] or int *anArray (which is effectively the same, because array decays to pointer). You should also make sure that the function knows how big your array is either by agreement or passing it as a parameter for it can not use sizeof for the purpose.
if I have an array
double i[5] = {1.023, 1.22, 1.56, 2, 5, 3.331};
how do i sort the values so that they look like this:
double i[5] = {1.023, 1.22, 1.56, 2, 3.331, 5};
i've tried qsort() with no luck, after trying some examples, i came up with:
qsort(i, 5, sizeof(double), sort);
int sort(const void *x, const void *y)
{
return (*(double*)x - *(double*)y);
}
with => error: incompatible type for argument 1
not sorting the array.....
The first argument to qsort is the pointer to the start of the array to be sorted. Instead of
qsort(i[5], 5, sizeof(double), sort);
it should read
qsort(i, 5, sizeof(double), sort);
Some further observations:
The length of i's initializer is incorrect (i has five elements, yet the initializer has six).
Hard-coding the 5 into the qsort call is asking for trouble later on.
The name "i" is most commonly used for loop counters and the like.
Calling the comparison function sort is confusing.
Your comparison function is wrong. Consider how it would compare the numbers 1.1 and 1.2. Also think about what would happen if the difference between the two values doesn't fit in an int.
I would rewrite your entire example like so:
double arr[] = {1.023, 1.22, 1.56, 2, 5, 3.331};
int cmp(const void *x, const void *y)
{
double xx = *(double*)x, yy = *(double*)y;
if (xx < yy) return -1;
if (xx > yy) return 1;
return 0;
}
int main() {
qsort(arr, sizeof(arr)/sizeof(arr[0]), sizeof(arr[0]), cmp);
}
Note that the above comparison function still doesn't correctly handle NaNs; I leave it as an exercise for the reader to fix that.
I am trying to write a function that prints out the elements in an array. However when I work with the arrays that are passed, I don't know how to iterate over the array.
void
print_array(int* b)
{
int sizeof_b = sizeof(b) / sizeof(b[0]);
int i;
for (i = 0; i < sizeof_b; i++)
{
printf("%d", b[i]);
}
}
What is the best way to do iterate over the passed array?
You need to also pass the size of the array to the function.
When you pass in the array to your function, you are really passing in the address of the first element in that array. So the pointer is only pointing to the first element once inside your function.
Since memory in the array is continuous though, you can still use pointer arithmetic such as (b+1) to point to the second element or equivalently b[1]
void print_array(int* b, int num_elements)
{
for (int i = 0; i < num_elements; i++)
{
printf("%d", b[i]);
}
}
This trick only works with arrays not pointers:
sizeof(b) / sizeof(b[0])
... and arrays are not the same as pointers.
Why don't you use function templates for this (C++)?
template<class T, int N> void f(T (&r)[N]){
}
int main(){
int buf[10];
f(buf);
}
EDIT 2:
The qn now appears to have C tag and the C++ tag is removed.
For C, you have to pass the length (number of elements)of the array.
For C++, you can pass the length, BUT, if you have access to C++0x, BETTER is to use std::array. See here and here. It carries the length, and provides check for out-of-bound if you access elements using the at() member function.
In C99, you can require that an array an array has at least n elements thusly:
void print_array(int b[static n]);
6.7.5.3.7: A declaration of a parameter as ‘‘array of type’’ shall be adjusted to ‘‘qualified pointer to
type’’, where the type qualifiers (if any) are those specified within the [ and ] of the
array type derivation. If the keyword static also appears within the [ and ] of the
array type derivation, then for each call to the function, the value of the corresponding
actual argument shall provide access to the first element of an array with at least as many
elements as specified by the size expression.
In GCC you can pass the size of an array implicitly like this:
void print_array(int n, int b[n]);
You could try this...
#include <cstdio>
void
print_array(int b[], size_t N)
{
for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i)
printf("%d ", b[i]);
printf("\n");
}
template <size_t N>
inline void
print_array(int (&b)[N])
{
// could have loop here, but inline forwarding to
// single function eliminates code bloat...
print_array(b, N);
}
int main()
{
int a[] = { 1, 2 };
int b[] = { };
int c[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
print_array(a);
// print_array(b);
print_array(c);
}
...interestingly b doesn't work...
array_size.cc: In function `int main()':
array_size.cc:19: error: no matching function for call to `print_array(int[0u])'
JoshD points out in comments below the issue re 0 sized arrays (a GCC extension), and the size inference above.
In c++ you can also use a some type of list class implemented as an array with a size method or as a struct with a size member(in c or c++).
Use variable to pass the size of array.
int sizeof_b = sizeof(b) / sizeof(b[0]); does nothing but getting the pre-declared array size, which is known, and you could have passed it as an argument; for instance, void print_array(int*b, int size). size could be the user-defined size too.
int sizeof_b = sizeof(b) / sizeof(b[0]); will cause redundant iteration when the number of elements is less than the pre-declared array-size.
The question has already some good answers, for example the second one. However there is a lack of explanation so I would like to extend the sample and explain it:
Using template and template parameters and in this case None-Type Template parameters makes it possible to get the size of a fixed array with any type.
Assume you have such a function template:
template<typename T, int S>
int getSizeOfArray(T (&arr)[S]) {
return S;
}
The template is clearly for any type(here T) and a fixed integer(S).
The function as you see takes a reference to an array of S objects of type T, as you know in C++ you cannot pass arrays to functions by value but by reference so the function has to take a reference.
Now if u use it like this:
int i_arr[] = { 3, 8, 90, -1 };
std::cout << "number f elements in Array: " << getSizeOfArray(i_arr) << std::endl;
The compiler will implicitly instantiate the template function and detect the arguments, so the S here is 4 which is returned and printed to output.