C Pointer Arithmetic Problems - c

I'm having a little fiddle with pointer arithmetic and just pointer in general and I've pulled together this code.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdarg.h>
int main(int argc,char **argv){
void *ptr=NULL;
char a='a';
int i0=0;
char b='b';
int i1=1;
char c='c';
int i2=2;
ptr=&a;
//What do I do here to get to i0?
printf("%d",(int*)ptr); //and to print it out?
while(1);
return 0;
}
My question is exactly what I put into the comments. How do I get ptr to point to i0 without doing 'ptr=&i0;' using pointer arithmetic? Also how do I then print it out correctly for characters and integers(one method for char and one for int).
Thanks in advance. ;)

The only way to get a pointer to the location of i0 is & i0.
While some compilers may align i0 so that * ((int*) (((char*) ptr) - 1)) can be used to access i0, that's not guaranteed. Compilers often reorder local variables or may not even store them in memory at all.

You can't get ptr to point to i0 using pointer arithmetic. Pointer arithmetic only works within the bounds of a single array object (non-array variables are treated as arrays of size 1). You can't use pointer arithmetic to make a pointer skip from one standalone object to another.

Your code doesn't make sense. You have no guarantee of where a, i0, b, i1, c and i2 are defined in memory when they're created - so you can't use pointer arithmetic to move from the address of a (ptr=&a) to i0.
If you want ptr to equal i0's location you can do ptr = &i0. If i0 was an integer (which it is) it will be 4 bytes big, so you can use pointer arithmetic to move through that integer 1 btye at a time if your pointer is void/char.

You can't do this.
Pointer arithmetic works on pointer to array elements that is, you can do arithmetic on a pointer that points to an element within an array to adjust the pointer to another element within that same array.
You cannot do pointer arithmetic on a pointer to a variable and make it point to another unrelated variable.

You can only do pointer arithmetic within a whole object (like an array). This works:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
int arr[100];
int *ptr;
arr[42] = 42;
ptr = arr; /* ptr points to the 1st element */
printf("%d\n", *(ptr + 42)); /* contents of the 43rd element */
return 0;
}

the only thing I can think of is:
ptr += ((char*)&i0 - &a)
but not sure if it's valid anyway and it doesn't make much difference from ptr = &i0
as others pointed out, in accordance to the standard you can only do pointer arithmetic within bounds of a single object, like a struct or array, so the code above even if it might work is not really correct

In this code sample, without doing
ptr=&i0;
You cannot get ptr to point to i0 portably because,
i0 is just a local variable & it's address is not stored in any other variable.

You'll have to do something like this:
int main(void)
{
union u
{
char ch;
int i;
} arr[] = { { .ch = 'a' }, { .i = 0 }, { .ch = 'b' }, { .i = 1 } };
union u *ptr = &arr[0];
printf("%d\n", ptr[1].i);
}
Not exactly what you wrote but would work.

Related

What is the difference between pointer to array and pointer to pointer?

I'm new in programming and learning about pointers in array. I'm a bit confused right now. Have a look at the program below:
#include <stdio.h>
int fun();
int main()
{
int num[3][3]={23,32,478,55,0,56,25,13, 80};
printf("%d\n",*(*(num+0)+1));
fun(num);
printf("%d\n", *(*(num+0)+1));
*(*(num+0)+0)=23;
printf("%d\n",*(*(num+0)));
return 0;
}
int fun(*p) // Compilation error
{
*(p+0)=0;
return 0;
}
This was the program written in my teacher's notes. Here in the main() function, in the printf() function dereference operator is being used two times because num is pointer to array so first time dereference operator will give pointer to int and then second one will give the value at which the pointer is pointing to.
My question is that when I'm passing the array name as argument to the function fun() then why *p is used; why not **p as num is a pointer to array?
Second thing why *(p+0) is used to change the value of zeroth element of the array; why not *(*(p+0)+0)=0 as in the main() function *(*(num+0)+0) is used to change the value of zeroth element?
The whole thing is very confusing for me but I have to understand it anyway. I have searched about this and found that there is a difference between pointer to array and pointer to pointer but I couldn't understand much.
The trick is the array-pointer-decay: When you mention the name of an array, it will decay into a pointer to its first element in almost all contexts. That is num is simply an array of three arrays of three integers (type = int [3][3]).
Lets analyse the expression *(*(num + 1) + 2).
When you mention num in the expression *(num + 1), it decays into a pointer to its first element which is an array of three integers (type = int (*)[3]). On this pointer pointer arithmetic is performed, and the size of whatever the pointer points to is added to the value of the pointer. In this case it is the size of an array of three integers (that's 12 bytes on many machines). After dereferencing the pointer, you are left with a type of int [3].
However, this dereferencing only concerns the type, because right after the dereferencing operation, we see expression *(/*expression of type int[3]*/ + 2), so the inner expression decays back into a pointer to the first array element. This pointer contains the same address as the pointer that results from num + 1, but it has a different type: int*. Consequently, the pointer arithmetic on this pointer advances the pointer by two integers (8 bytes). So the expression *(*(num + 1) + 2) yields the integer element at an offset of 12 + 8 = 20 bytes, which is the sixth integer in the array.
Regarding your question about the call of fun(), that call is actually broken, and only works because your teacher did not include the arguments in the forward declaration of fun(). The code
int fun(int* arg);
int main() {
int num[3][3] = ...;
...
fun(num);
}
would have generated a compile time error due to the wrong pointer type. The code of your teacher "works", because the pointer to the first array in num is the same as the pointer to the first element of the first array in num, i. e. his code is equivalent to
int fun(int* arg);
int main() {
int num[3][3] = ...;
...
//both calls are equivalent
fun(num[0]);
fun(&num[0][0]);
}
which would compile without error.
This example shows a matrix, pointers to the first integers of arrays, and pointer to pointer
#include<stdio.h>
int fun(int (*p)[3]); /* p is pointer to array of 3 ints */
int main()
{
/* matrix */
int num[3][3]={{23,32,478},{55,0,56},{25,13, 80}};
/* three pointers to first integer of array */
int *pnum[3] = {num[0], num[1], num[2]};
/* pointer to pointer */
int **ppnum = pnum;
printf("%d\n", *(*(num+1)+2));
fun(num);
printf("%d\n", *(*(num+1)+2));
pnum[1][2] = 2;
printf("%d\n", *(*(num+1)+2));
ppnum[1][2] = 3;
printf("%d\n", *(*(num+1)+2));
return 0;
}
int fun(int (*p)[3])
{
p[1][2]=1;
return 0;
}
You do not actually need any pointers to print anything here.
Your int num[3][3] is actually an array of three elements, each of which is an array of three integers. Thus num[0][0] = 23, num[1][1] = 0, and so on. Thus you can say printf("%d", num[0][0]) to print the first element of the array.
Pointer to variable:
Pointer is variable which stores the address( of a variable). Every one know that.
Pointer to Array:
An array is a variable which has the starting point(address) of group of same objects.
And the pointer is a variable which stores the starting point(address) of an Array.
For example:
int iArray[3];
iArray is a variable which has an address value of three integers and the memory is allocated statically. And the below syntax is provided in a typical programming languages.
// iArray[0] = *(iArray+0);
// iArray[1] = *(iArray+1);
// iArray[2] = *(iArray+2);
In the above the iArray is a variable through which we can access the three integer variables, using any of the syntax mentioned above.
*(iArray+0); // Here iArray+0 is the address of the first object. and * is to dereference
*(iArray+1); // Here iArray+1 is the address of the second object. and * is to dereference
So simple, what is there to confuse.
The below lines are for your understanding
int iArray1[3];
int iArray2[3][3];
int *ipArray = 0;
ipArray = iArray1; // correct
ipArray = iArray2[0]; // correct
ipArray = iArray2[2]; // correct
int **ippArray = iArray2; // wrong
As per the above last line, compiler will not take it as a valid assignment. So **p is not used.
Pointer arthmatic cannot be applied on double arrays because of the way memory is allocated.

Multiplying what's pointed to by pointers

Pointer1 points to 5.
Pointer2 points to 3.
I want to multiply 5*3, but I only have the pointers. How would I do this in C?
Also, what does uint32_t *pointer mean when:
pointer[2] = {1, 2};
I do not know what is so hard for the answerers to understand about this question. It is obviously about dereferencing pointers.
This is how you display the contents of the pointer that it is pointing to:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int num1 = 5;
int num2 = 3;
int* num1_ptr = &num1;
int* num2_ptr - &num2;
int sum = *num1_ptr * *num2_ptr;
printf("%d\n", sum);
return 0;
}
*num1_ptr and *num2_ptr takes your pointers and references what the contents of that memory address.
I can't answer the first half of your question without more information, but uint32_t* pointer is simply a pointer to an unsigned 32-bit integer value (unsigned int and uint32_t are usually equivalent types, depending on your compiler).
If I see a declaration that simply reads uint32_t* pointer without more information I'm going to assume it's a pointer to a single value, and that using the indexing operator [n] on such a pointer is basically overflowing the single-element-sized buffer. However if the pointer is assigned the result from an array or buffer function (e.g. malloc, calloc, etc) then using the indexing operator is fine, however I would prefer to see uint32_t pointer[] used as the declaration as it makes it much easier to determine the developer's intent.
uint32_t *pointer is just a pointer with garbage value unless you point it to something.
pointer[0] = 1;
pointer[1] = 2;
is only valid if you have earlier pointed it to some array of type uint32_t with atleast size two or to a block containing uint32_ts defined using malloc as follows:
uint32_t *pointer;
pointer = (uint32_t*)malloc(sizeof(int*SIZE); //SIZE > 2 here
or
uint32_t array[10];
pointer = & array[0]; // also, pointer = array; would also work.
int main(void)
{
int variableA = 5;
int variableB = 3;
int* ptr1 = &variableA; // Pointer1 points to 5.
int* ptr2 = &variableB; // Pointer2 points to 3.
int answer;
answer = (*ptr1) * (*ptr2); // I want to multiply 5*3, but I only have the pointers.
// Answer gets set to [value stored at ptr1(5)] MultipliedBy [value stored at ptr2(3)]
}
Your misconception is that pointers do not refer to values, such as 5 and 3.
pointers refer to variables, such as variableA and variableB; those variables have values which can be accessed and changed via the pointer.But the pointer only refers to the variable, not directly to the value behind it.

how to get the value from the array in C?

I have a two dimensional array like this:
void getC(int **p)
{
*p = &c[0][0];
}
int c[10][10];
int *a;
getC(a);
a[0][0];
it says error: no match for 'operator[]' in `a[0][0];` what is the problem and how to fix it?
You're compiling a C program with a C++ compiler. Watch out!
You need to put the definition of c above the getC function (or provide a forward declaration).
You have statements outside of a function, which isn't allowed in C. Wrap the int *a and subsequent lines with int main(void) { ... }
You need a & to make your getC() call legal - you're passing an int *, but it expects int **:
getC(&a);
The statement a[0][0] has no effect, and is anyway wrong since a is just an int *; you can't dereference it twice.
You should probably get a beginner C book and start working through it.
Essentially you are sort of downgrading the array/pointer from an int (*)[10] (pointer to array of 10 int) to a simple int pointer, by just returning the address of the first element of the 2dim array. While this is techically correct (the address of one element of the 2dim array is of course an int*), the information about the structure/layout of the ints in the array is lost, so the resulting a-ptr doesn't now anything about the fact that the int was part of a [10][10] structure.
In your case, the only way to get to the array elements would be to multiply your way through the int arrays, based on your own knowledge that at address a there are 100 ints organized 10x10:
int *a;
getC(&a);
...= a[10*x + y]; // equivalent of c[x][y];
.
However, essentially, the correct way (completely preserving types) would be
int c[10][10];
void getC(int (**p)[10]) // pointer to pointer to array of 10 ints
{
*p = c; // c itself can seamlessly change into a pointer to one sub-element
// (i.e. pointer to array of 10)
}
int main()
{
int (*a)[10]; // pointer to array(s) of 10 ints
int q;
getC(&a);
q= a[9][9];
...
}
The same again with one more dimension level (probably the most intutive solution):
However, essentially, the correct way (completely preserving types) would be
int c[10][10];
void getC(int (**p)[10][10]) // pointer to pointer to array of 10x10 ints
{
*p = &c; // &c can seamlessly change into a pointer to 10x10 ints
}
int main()
{
int (*a)[10][10]; // pointer to array(s) of 10x10 ints
int q;
getC(&a); // pass adress of pointer to 10x10 ints
q= (*a)[9][9]; // need *a in brackets to derference the pointer (operator precedence)
...
}

Dereference void pointer

Even after casting a void pointer, I am getting compilation error while dereferencing it.
Could anyone please let me know the reason of this.
int lVNum = 2;
void *lVptr;
lVptr = (int*)&lVNum;
printf("\nlVptr[60 ] is %d \n",lVptr[1]);
It doesn't make sense to dereference a void pointer. How will the compiler interpret the memory that the pointer is pointing to? You need to cast the pointer to a proper type first:
int x = *(int*)lVptr;
printf("\nlVptr[60 ] is %d \n", *(int*)lVptr);
This will cast the void pointer to a pointer to an int and then dereference it correctly.
If you want to treat it as an array (of one), you could do a slightly ugly ((int *)lVptr)[0]. Using [1] is out of bounds, and therefore not a good idea (as for lVptr[60]...)
It's still a void* because that's what you declared it as. Any pointer may be implicitly converted to a void*, so that cast does nothing and you are left with a pointer to void just as you began with.
You'll need to declare it as an int*.
void *some_ptr = /* whatever */;
int *p = (int*)some_ptr;
// now you have a pointer to int cast from a pointer to void
Note that the cast to an int* is also unnecessary, for the same reason you don't have to (and should not) cast the return value of malloc in C.
void*'s can be implicitly converted to and from any other pointer type. I added the cast here only for clarity, in your code you would simply write;
int *p = some_void_ptr;
Also, this:
lVptr[1]
Is wrong. You have a pointer to a single int, not two. That dereference causes undefined behavior.
You can not dereference a void pointer because it doesn't have a type,
first you need to cast it(int *)lVptr, then dereference it *(int *)lVptr.
int lVNum = 2;
void *lVptr;
lVptr = &lVNum;
printf("\nlVptr[60 ] is %d \n",*(int *)lVptr);
Example of what you might be trying to do:
#include <stdio.h>
int main () {
void *v;
unsigned long int *i = (unsigned long int *)v;
*i = 5933016743776703571;
size_t j = sizeof(i);
printf("There are %ld bytes in v\n", j);
size_t k;
for (k = 0; k < j; k++) {
printf("Byte %ld of v: %c\n", k, ((char *)v)[k]);
}
}
Output:
There are 8 bytes in v
Byte 0 of v: S
Byte 1 of v: T
Byte 2 of v: A
Byte 3 of v: C
Byte 4 of v: K
Byte 5 of v: O
Byte 6 of v: V
Byte 7 of v: R
A void pointer is just that, a pointer to a void (nothing definable).
Useful in some instances.
For example malloc() returns a void pointer precisely because it allocated memory for an UNDEFINED purpose.
Some functions may likewise take void pointers as arguments because they don't care about the actual content other than a location.
To be honest, the snippet you posted makes absolutely no sense, can't even guess what you were trying to do.
# Code-Guru
I tried to compile it in visual studio. It gives error - expression must be a pointer to complete object.
Thanks teppic,
As you suggested, the following compiles and yields right result.
#include<stdio.h>
void main(){
printf("study void pointers \n");
int lvnum = 2;
void *lvptr;
lvptr = &lvnum;
printf("\n lvptr is %d\n",((int *)lvptr)[0]);
}
However if I try printf("\n lvptr is %d\n",((int *)lVptr)[60]);
It compiles and runs but gives random number.
Thanks a lot, friends for all the suggestions. Apologies that I assigned a void pointer to unnecessarily casted int pointer and expected it to get dereferenced. However I should have casted it when I want to dereference it.
Purpose of the snippet:
In my sources I found klocwork error which was caused by similar situation. On the contrary the program not only compiled but also gave correct results. Reason- it is a low level code (no OS) where the memory assigned to the void pointer is already reserved till the count of like 60. But the klocwork tool was unable to parse the files having that limit resulting in error. I did a lot of brain storming and ended up in something silly.
Saurabh

Understanding C: Pointers and Structs

I'm trying to better understand c, and I'm having a hard time understanding where I use the * and & characters. And just struct's in general. Here's a bit of code:
void word_not(lc3_word_t *R, lc3_word_t A) {
int *ptr;
*ptr = &R;
&ptr[0] = 1;
printf("this is R at spot 0: %d", ptr[0]);
}
lc3_word_t is a struct defined like this:
struct lc3_word_t__ {
BIT b15;
BIT b14;
BIT b13;
BIT b12;
BIT b11;
BIT b10;
BIT b9;
BIT b8;
BIT b7;
BIT b6;
BIT b5;
BIT b4;
BIT b3;
BIT b2;
BIT b1;
BIT b0;
};
This code doesn't do anything, it compiles but once I run it I get a "Segmentation fault" error. I'm just trying to understand how to read and write to a struct and using pointers. Thanks :)
New Code:
void word_not(lc3_word_t *R, lc3_word_t A) {
int* ptr;
ptr = &R;
ptr->b0 = 1;
printf("this is: %d", ptr->b0);
}
Here's a quick rundown of pointers (as I use them, at least):
int i;
int* p; //I declare pointers with the asterisk next to the type, not the name;
//it's not conventional, but int* seems like the full data type to me.
i = 17; //i now holds the value 17 (obviously)
p = &i; //p now holds the address of i (&x gives you the address of x)
*p = 3; //the thing pointed to by p (in our case, i) now holds the value 3
//the *x operator is sort of the reverse of the &x operator
printf("%i\n", i); //this will print 3, cause we changed the value of i (via *p)
And paired with structs:
typedef struct
{
unsigned char a;
unsigned char r;
unsigned char g;
unsigned char b;
} Color;
Color c;
Color* p;
p = &c; //just like the last code
p->g = 255; //set the 'g' member of the struct to 255
//this works because the compiler knows that Color* p points to a Color
//note that we don't use p[x] to get at the members - that's for arrays
And finally, with arrays:
int a[] = {1, 2, 7, 4};
int* p;
p = a; //note the lack of the & (address of) operator
//we don't need it, as arrays behave like pointers internally
//alternatively, "p = &a[0];" would have given the same result
p[2] = 3; //set that seven back to what it should be
//note the lack of the * (dereference) operator
//we don't need it, as the [] operator dereferences for us
//alternatively, we could have used "*(p+2) = 3;"
Hope this clears some things up - and don't hesitate to ask for more details if there's anything I've left out. Cheers!
I think you are looking for a general tutorial on C (of which there are many). Just check google. The following site has good info that will explain your questions better.
http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/pointers/
http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/structures/
They will help you with basic syntax and understanding what the operators are and how they work. Note that the site is C++ but the basics are the same in C.
First of all, your second line should be giving you some sort of warning about converting a pointer into an int. The third line I'm surprised compiles at all. Compile at your highest warning level, and heed the warnings.
The * does different things depending on whether it is in a declaration or an expression. In a declaration (like int *ptr or lc3_word_t *R) it just means "this is a pointer."
In an expression (like *ptr = &R) it means to dereference the pointer, which is basically to use the pointed-to value like a regular variable.
The & means "take the address of this." If something is not a pointer, you use it to turn it into a pointer. If something is already a pointer (like R or ptr in your function), you don't need to take the address of it again.
int *ptr;
*ptr = &R;
Here ptr is not initialized. It can point to whatever. Then you dereference it with * and assign it the address of R. That should not compile since &R is of type lc3_word_t** (pointer to pointer), while *ptr is of type int.
&ptr[0] = 1; is not legal either. Here you take the address of ptr[0] and try to assign it 1. This is also illegal since it is an rvalue, but you can think of it that you cannot change the location of the variable ptr[0] since what you're essentially trying to do is changing the address of ptr[0].
Let's step through the code.
First you declare a pointer to int: int *ptr. By the way I like to write it like this int* ptr (with * next to int instead of ptr) to remind myself that pointer is part of the type, i.e. the type of ptr is pointer to int.
Next you assign the value pointed to by ptr to the address of R. * dereferences the pointer (gets the value pointed to) and & gives the address. This is your problem. You've mixed up the types. Assigning the address of R (lc3_word_t**) to *ptr (int) won't work.
Next is &ptr[0] = 1;. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense either. &ptr[0] is the address of the first element of ptr (as an array). I'm guessing you want just the value at the first address, that is ptr[0] or *ptr.

Resources