I'm having some issues with storing an address of a specific value in an array of strings to a pointer and printing it out. Please excuse the bad variable names, they are just for the example.
char **code; // code is an array of 100 strings of length 8 characters
code = malloc (100*sizeof(*code));
for (i=0; i<100; i++) {
code[i]=malloc(8*sizeof(**code));
}
char **r; // r is an array of 16 strings of 32 characters
r = malloc (16*sizeof(*r));
for (i = 0; i < 16; i++)
r[i] = malloc(32*sizeof(**r));
char *a; // a is a pointer to a string
a = (char *) &r[13]; // point a to value at r[13]
*a = (char *)&code[100]; // trying to assign the value of r[13] to the address of code[100]
printf("Code 100 Add: %p a Val: %i\n", &code[100], *sp); // trying to check values.
I'm trying to assign the value of a (which points to r[13], so assign value of r[13]) to the value of the Address of the string at code[100]. Is even a string of 32 characters the best way to do this?
Appreciate any help,
Gareth
a = (char *) &r[13]; // point a to value at r[13]
Turn on your compiler warnings, and pay attention to what the compiler tell you when you remove this cast. You shouldn't need any casts in this code.
The type of r is char** and so the type of r[13] is char*, and the type of &r[13] is char**, which you're assigning to a char*.
P.s., next time please also include the actual error you receive vs what you expected.
To assign a string, use strncpy. Don't copy the pointer value directly because you will free it twice later this way (among other problems).
&r[13] is not a pointer to char.
You just need to
r[13] = code[100]
I do agree with Frederik that you should be careful when free()-ing the allocated memory since you now have two pointers pointing at the same memory block. If you prefer to follows his advice, try the following:
strncpy(r[13], code[100], 8)
Rather than assigning a pointer to a memory address, you're going to want to copy the data at that memory address using strcpy.
With definition of char *a; the *a on the left-hand side of an assignment becomes an lvalue of type char. You can assign pointer values there as integers, as in square peg into a round hole, though it does not make much sense. To copy strings use str[nl]cpy(3).
I hate to ask a question during someone else's question... but shouldn't the char array setup/malloc calls be something more like this? Isn't he allocating too much with sizeof(**code)? And then... if it's for 8 characters... won't we want 9 to make room for '\0'?
char **code; // code is an array of 100 strings of length 8 characters
code = (char**) malloc (100*sizeof(char*));
for (i=0; i<100; i++) {
code[i] = (char*)malloc(9*sizeof(char));
}
Related
I'm really new to C pointers and I'm coming from Java/C++. I am trying to append a char* c to a char** cArray. Here is kind of what I have so far:
char **cArray = "abc";
char *c = "def";
cArray += &c;
printf("%s", cArray)
and output should be: abcdef
My question is, How do I append a char * to a char ** in C?
Thank you for any tips you have!
You seem to have a misunderstanding of what a pointer and an array are. First lets start with an array. An array is a contiguous fixed-size block of memory. That is to say, an array is a constant number of values next to each other.
So, to start with, the idea of "Appending" an array makes sense in the way that you can add an item to the next empty spot in an array. But it would not be right to say the array is growing. An array is not the equivalent of Java's Array List.
Lastly, I will point out static arrays are declared with:
int val[3];
Where 3 can be any other constant value interpreted as a size_t.
Next, lets discuss pointers. Pointers are not arrays, do not confuse the two- although many people find it comforting to think of them as interchangeable (and for the most part you can get away with it!). However, this is one of the cases where they are not. So what are pointers?
Pointers denote the location of a value in memory. So, a pointer could say point to an element in our val array we created above. If we created a pointer to point at each element in our val array and we printed them all to stdout we would see that they are all 4 bytes away from each other. This is because arrays have their values located right next to each other (contiguous in memory) and sizeof(int) would return 4 (on my system).
Your main misunderstanding seems to be that pointers need to point to anything at all. They do not. Just like you can have a value which holds no information (or all of the bits are set to 0), you can surely have a pointer that points no nowhere at all. As a matter of fact that's exactly what you do.
char **cArray = "abc";
char *c = "def";
cArray += &c;
printf("%s", cArray);
Okay, lets take this apart line by line. First you declare a char ** called cArray and initialize it to "abc". Well, your variable cArray is a pointer to a pointer. The value "abc" I believe is a const char*. Therefore, you probably don't want to assign a pointer to a character as a pointer to a pointer. The consequence being, the value "abc\0" will be interpreted as another memory address. This, obviously, will not point to anything useful and accessing this memory would result in a seg fault.
Next, you initialize c to be a cstring containing "def".
Finally, you increment the address pointed to by cArray by whatever address "def" happens to be located at. So now, cArray is no longer even pointing to "abc" at all (nevermind interpreting it incorrectly).
Then we try to print some block of memory pointed to by cArray that is in no way even remotely close to any of the bits our program wants to be touching.
All of this said, say I had two cstrings and I wanted to get a third such that it is the first appended to the second:
char* a = "abc";
char* b = "def";
size_t sizeA = strlen(a);
size_t sizeB = strlen(b);
size_t size = sizeof(char) * (sizeA + sizeB + 1); //Size of our new memory block large enough to contain both a and b.
//Leave additional space for null terminator
char* c = malloc(size); //Actually allocate new memory
memcpy(c, a, sizeA); //Copy a into the first half of c
memcpy(c + sizeA, b, sizeB); //Copy b into the second half
c[sizeA + sizeB] = '\0'; //Assign null terminator to last character
printf("%s", c);
free(c); //Never forget
Hi how to access character array using integer point.
char arr[10] = {'1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9','10'};
int *ptr;
How i can print values of 'arr' using pointer ptr?
It is a little unclear what your goal is, but trying to print out a character array with an integer pointer is a bit like trying to get to the second step taking four-steps at a time. When you tell the compiler that you would like to reference a memory address with an integer pointer, the compiler knows that an integer is sizeof (int) bytes (generally 4-bytes on x86/x86_64). So attempting to access each element in a character array with an integer pointer and normal pointer arithmetic wouldn't work. (you would be advancing 4-bytes at a time).
However printing the character array though an integer pointer is possible if you use the integer pointer for the starting address of the array and advance the pointer by the number of characters in the array by casting back to char. While it is doubtful this is your goal, the plain statement of your question seems to suggest it. To accomplish this, you could:
#include <stdio.h>
int main (void)
{
char arr[] = {'1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9'};
int *ptr = (int *)arr;
unsigned int i;
for (i = 0; i < sizeof arr; i++)
printf (" %c", (*(char *)ptr + i));
putchar ('\n');
return 0;
}
Output
$ ./bin/char_array_int_ptr
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Note: your original initialization of your array with a character '10' was invalid. If this was an assignment, it is likely intended to expose you to how pointer arithmetic is influenced by type and the ability to cast from and to type char (without violating strict aliasing rules)
If you are just after the integer values you can print out the characters as integers
for (i = 0; i < sizeof(arr)/sizeof(arr[0]); ++i)
{
printf( "%d ", arr[i] );
}
Using a pointer of the wrong data type to access anything is undefined behavior, thus making it not something you want to do. If you want to cast a char to an integer, you can do that. If you want to print the integer value of a char, you can do that too.
But using a pointer type integer to access a char array is undefined behavior.
I am practicing allocation memory using malloc() with pointers, but 1 observation about pointers is that, why can strcpy() accept str variable without *:
char *str;
str = (char *) malloc(15);
strcpy(str, "Hello");
printf("String = %s, Address = %u\n", str, str);
But with integers, we need * to give str a value.
int *str;
str = (int *) malloc(15);
*str = 10;
printf("Int = %d, Address = %u\n", *str, str);
it really confuses me why strcpy() accepts str, because in my own understanding, "Hello" will be passed to the memory location of str that will cause some errors.
In C, a string is (by definition) an array of characters. However (whether we realize it all the time or not) we almost always end up accessing arrays using pointers. So, although C does not have a true "string" type, for most practical purposes, the type pointer-to-char (i.e. char *) serves this purpose. Almost any function that accepts or returns a string will actually use a char *. That's why strlen() and strcpy() accept char *. That's why printf %s expects a char *. In all of these cases, what these functions need is a pointer to the first character of the string. (They then read the rest of the string sequentially, stopping when they find the terminating '\0' character.)
In these cases, you don't use an explicit * character. * would extract just the character pointed to (that is, the first character of the string), but you don't want to extract the first character, you want to hand the whole string (that is, a pointer to the whole string) to strcpy so it can do its job.
In your second example, you weren't working with a string at all. (The fact that you used a variable named str confused me for a moment.) You have a pointer to some ints, and you're working with the first int pointed to. Since you're directly accessing one of the things pointed to, that's why you do need the explicit * character.
The * is called indirection or dereference operator.
In your second code,
*str = 10;
assigns the value 10 to the memory address pointed by str. This is one value (i.e., a single variable).
OTOTH, strcpy() copies the whole string all at a time. It accepts two char * parameters, so you don't need the * to dereference to get the value while passing arguments.
You can use the dereference operator, without strcpy(), copying element by element, like
char *str;
str = (char *) malloc(15); //success check TODO
int len = strlen("Hello"); //need string.h header
for (i = 0; i < len; i ++)
*(str+i)= "Hello"[i]; // the * form. as you wanted
str[i] = 0; //null termination
Many string manipulation functions, including strcpy, by convention and design, accept the pointer to the first character of the array, not the pointer to the whole array, even though their values are the same.
This is because their types are different; e.g. a pointer to char[10] has a different type from that of a pointer to char[15], and passing around the pointer to the whole array would be impossible or very clumsy because of this, unless you cast them everywhere or make different functions for different lengths.
For this reason, they have established a convention of passing around a string with the pointer to its first character, not to the whole array, possibly with its length when necessary. Many functions that operate on an array, such as memset, work the same way.
Well, here's what happens in the first snippet :
You are first dynamically allocating 15 bytes of memory, storing this address to the char pointer, which is pointer to a 1-byte sequence of data (a string).
Then you call strcpy(), which iterates over the string and copy characters, byte per byte, into the newly allocated memory space. Each character is a number based on the ASCII table, eg. character a = 97 (take a look at man ascii).
Then you pass this address to printf() which reads from the string, byte per byte, then flush it to your terminal.
In the second snippet, the process is the same, you are still allocating 15 bytes, storing the address in an int * pointer. An int is a 4 byte data type.
When you do *str = 10, you are dereferencing the pointer to store the value 10 at the address pointed by str. Remind what I wrote ahead, you could have done *str = 'a', and this index 0 integer would had the value 97, even if you try to read it as an int. you can event print it if you would.
So why strcpy() can take a int * as parameter? Because it's a memory space where it can write, byte per byte. You can store "Hell" in an int, then "o!" in the next one.
It's just all about usage easiness.
See there is a difference between = operator and the function strcpy.
* is deference operator. When you say *str, it means value at the memory location pointed by str.
Also as a good practice, use this
str = (char *) malloc( sizeof(char)*15 )
It is because the size of a data type might be different on different platforms. Hence use sizeof function to determine its actual size at the run time.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void){
char *p = "Hello";
p = "Bye"; //Why is this valid C code? Why no derefencing operator?
int *z;
int x;
*z = x
z* = 2 //Works
z = 2 //Doesn't Work, Why does it work with characters?
char *str[2] = {"Hello","Good Bye"};
print("%s", str[1]); //Prints Good-Bye. WHY no derefrencing operator?
// Why is this valid C code? If I created an array with pointers
// shouldn't the element print the memory address and not the string?
return 0;
}
My Questions are outlined with the comments. In gerneal I'm having trouble understanding character arrays and pointers. Specifically why I can acess them without the derefrencing operator.
In gerneal I'm having trouble understanding character arrays and pointers.
This is very common for beginning C programmers. I had the same confusion back about 1985.
p = "Bye";
Since p is declared to be char*, p is simply a variable that contains a memory address of a char. The assignment above sets the value of p to be the address of the first char of the constant string "Bye", in other words the address of the letter "B".
z = 2
z is declared to be char*, so the only thing you can assign to it is the memory address of a char. You can't assign 2 to z, because 2 isn't the address of a char, it's a constant integer value.
print("%s", str[1]);
In this case, str is defined to be an array of two char* variables. In your print statement, you're printing the second of those, which is the address of the first character in the string "Good Bye".
When you type "Bye", you are actually creating what is called a String Literal. Its a special case, but essentially, when you do
p = "Bye";
What you are doing is assigning the address of this String literal to p(the string itself is stored by the compiler in a implementation dependant way (I think) ). Technically address to the first element of a char array, as Richard J. Ross III explains.
Since it is a special case, it does not work with other types.
By the way, you should likely get a compiler warning for lines like char *p = "Hello";. You should be required to define them as const char *p = "Hello"; since modifying them is undefined as the link explains.
As to the printing code.
print("%s", str[1]);
This doesnt need a dereferencing operation, since internally %s requires a pointer(specifically char *) to be passed, thus the dereferencing is done by printf. You can test this by passing a value when printf is expecting a pointer. You should get a runtime crash when it tries to dereference it.
p = "Bye";
Is an assignment of the address of the literal to the pointer.
The
array[n]
operator works in a similar way as a dereferrence of the pointer "array" increased by n. It is not the same, but it works that way.
Remember that "Hello", "Bye" all are char * not char.
So the line, p="Bye"; means that pointer p is pointing to a const char *i.e."Bye"
But in the next case with int *
*z=2 means that
`int` pointed by `z` is assigned a value of 2
while, z=2 means the pointer z points to the same int, pointed by 2.But, 2 is not a int pointer to point other ints.So, the compiler flags the error
You're confusing something: It does work with characters just as it works with integers et cetera.
What it doesn't work with are strings, because they are character arrays and arrays can only be stored in a variable using the address of their first element.
Later on, you've created an array of character pointers, or an array of strings. That means very simply that the first element of that array is a string, the second is also a string. When it comes to the printing part, you're using the second element of the array. So, unsurprisingly, the second string is printed.
If you look at it this way, you'll see that the syntax is consistent.
I'm learning C right now and got a bit confused with character arrays - strings.
char name[15]="Fortran";
No problem with this - its an array that can hold (up to?) 15 chars
char name[]="Fortran";
C counts the number of characters for me so I don't have to - neat!
char* name;
Okay. What now? All I know is that this can hold an big number of characters that are assigned later (e.g.: via user input), but
Why do they call this a char pointer? I know of pointers as references to variables
Is this an "excuse"? Does this find any other use than in char*?
What is this actually? Is it a pointer? How do you use it correctly?
thanks in advance,
lamas
I think this can be explained this way, since a picture is worth a thousand words...
We'll start off with char name[] = "Fortran", which is an array of chars, the length is known at compile time, 7 to be exact, right? Wrong! it is 8, since a '\0' is a nul terminating character, all strings have to have that.
char name[] = "Fortran";
+======+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
|0x1234| |F|o|r|t|r|a|n|\0|
+======+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
At link time, the compiler and linker gave the symbol name a memory address of 0x1234.
Using the subscript operator, i.e. name[1] for example, the compiler knows how to calculate where in memory is the character at offset, 0x1234 + 1 = 0x1235, and it is indeed 'o'. That is simple enough, furthermore, with the ANSI C standard, the size of a char data type is 1 byte, which can explain how the runtime can obtain the value of this semantic name[cnt++], assuming cnt is an integer and has a value of 3 for example, the runtime steps up by one automatically, and counting from zero, the value of the offset is 't'. This is simple so far so good.
What happens if name[12] was executed? Well, the code will either crash, or you will get garbage, since the boundary of the array is from index/offset 0 (0x1234) up to 8 (0x123B). Anything after that does not belong to name variable, that would be called a buffer overflow!
The address of name in memory is 0x1234, as in the example, if you were to do this:
printf("The address of name is %p\n", &name);
Output would be:
The address of name is 0x00001234
For the sake of brevity and keeping with the example, the memory addresses are 32bit, hence you see the extra 0's. Fair enough? Right, let's move on.
Now on to pointers...
char *name is a pointer to type of char....
Edit:
And we initialize it to NULL as shown Thanks Dan for pointing out the little error...
char *name = (char*)NULL;
+======+ +======+
|0x5678| -> |0x0000| -> NULL
+======+ +======+
At compile/link time, the name does not point to anything, but has a compile/link time address for the symbol name (0x5678), in fact it is NULL, the pointer address of name is unknown hence 0x0000.
Now, remember, this is crucial, the address of the symbol is known at compile/link time, but the pointer address is unknown, when dealing with pointers of any type
Suppose we do this:
name = (char *)malloc((20 * sizeof(char)) + 1);
strcpy(name, "Fortran");
We called malloc to allocate a memory block for 20 bytes, no, it is not 21, the reason I added 1 on to the size is for the '\0' nul terminating character. Suppose at runtime, the address given was 0x9876,
char *name;
+======+ +======+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
|0x5678| -> |0x9876| -> |F|o|r|t|r|a|n|\0|
+======+ +======+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
So when you do this:
printf("The address of name is %p\n", name);
printf("The address of name is %p\n", &name);
Output would be:
The address of name is 0x00005678
The address of name is 0x00009876
Now, this is where the illusion that 'arrays and pointers are the same comes into play here'
When we do this:
char ch = name[1];
What happens at runtime is this:
The address of symbol name is looked up
Fetch the memory address of that symbol, i.e. 0x5678.
At that address, contains another address, a pointer address to memory and fetch it, i.e. 0x9876
Get the offset based on the subscript value of 1 and add it onto the pointer address, i.e. 0x9877 to retrieve the value at that memory address, i.e. 'o' and is assigned to ch.
That above is crucial to understanding this distinction, the difference between arrays and pointers is how the runtime fetches the data, with pointers, there is an extra indirection of fetching.
Remember, an array of type T will always decay into a pointer of the first element of type T.
When we do this:
char ch = *(name + 5);
The address of symbol name is looked up
Fetch the memory address of that symbol, i.e. 0x5678.
At that address, contains another address, a pointer address to memory and fetch it, i.e. 0x9876
Get the offset based on the value of 5 and add it onto the pointer address, i.e. 0x987A to retrieve the value at that memory address, i.e. 'r' and is assigned to ch.
Incidentally, you can also do that to the array of chars also...
Further more, by using subscript operators in the context of an array i.e. char name[] = "..."; and name[subscript_value] is really the same as *(name + subscript_value).
i.e.
name[3] is the same as *(name + 3)
And since the expression *(name + subscript_value) is commutative, that is in the reverse,
*(subscript_value + name) is the same as *(name + subscript_value)
Hence, this explains why in one of the answers above you can write it like this (despite it, the practice is not recommended even though it is quite legitimate!)
3[name]
Ok, how do I get the value of the pointer?
That is what the * is used for,
Suppose the pointer name has that pointer memory address of 0x9878, again, referring to the above example, this is how it is achieved:
char ch = *name;
This means, obtain the value that is pointed to by the memory address of 0x9878, now ch will have the value of 'r'. This is called dereferencing. We just dereferenced a name pointer to obtain the value and assign it to ch.
Also, the compiler knows that a sizeof(char) is 1, hence you can do pointer increment/decrement operations like this
*name++;
*name--;
The pointer automatically steps up/down as a result by one.
When we do this, assuming the pointer memory address of 0x9878:
char ch = *name++;
What is the value of *name and what is the address, the answer is, the *name will now contain 't' and assign it to ch, and the pointer memory address is 0x9879.
This where you have to be careful also, in the same principle and spirit as to what was stated earlier in relation to the memory boundaries in the very first part (see 'What happens if name[12] was executed' in the above) the results will be the same, i.e. code crashes and burns!
Now, what happens if we deallocate the block of memory pointed to by name by calling the C function free with name as the parameter, i.e. free(name):
+======+ +======+
|0x5678| -> |0x0000| -> NULL
+======+ +======+
Yes, the block of memory is freed up and handed back to the runtime environment for use by another upcoming code execution of malloc.
Now, this is where the common notation of Segmentation fault comes into play, since name does not point to anything, what happens when we dereference it i.e.
char ch = *name;
Yes, the code will crash and burn with a 'Segmentation fault', this is common under Unix/Linux. Under windows, a dialog box will appear along the lines of 'Unrecoverable error' or 'An error has occurred with the application, do you wish to send the report to Microsoft?'....if the pointer has not been mallocd and any attempt to dereference it, is guaranteed to crash and burn.
Also: remember this, for every malloc there is a corresponding free, if there is no corresponding free, you have a memory leak in which memory is allocated but not freed up.
And there you have it, that is how pointers work and how arrays are different to pointers, if you are reading a textbook that says they are the same, tear out that page and rip it up! :)
I hope this is of help to you in understanding pointers.
That is a pointer. Which means it is a variable that holds an address in memory. It "points" to another variable.
It actually cannot - by itself - hold large amounts of characters. By itself, it can hold only one address in memory. If you assign characters to it at creation it will allocate space for those characters, and then point to that address. You can do it like this:
char* name = "Mr. Anderson";
That is actually pretty much the same as this:
char name[] = "Mr. Anderson";
The place where character pointers come in handy is dynamic memory. You can assign a string of any length to a char pointer at any time in the program by doing something like this:
char *name;
name = malloc(256*sizeof(char));
strcpy(name, "This is less than 256 characters, so this is fine.");
Alternately, you can assign to it using the strdup() function, like this:
char *name;
name = strdup("This can be as long or short as I want. The function will allocate enough space for the string and assign return a pointer to it. Which then gets assigned to name");
If you use a character pointer this way - and assign memory to it, you have to free the memory contained in name before reassigning it. Like this:
if(name)
free(name);
name = 0;
Make sure to check that name is, in fact, a valid point before trying to free its memory. That's what the if statement does.
The reason you see character pointers get used a whole lot in C is because they allow you to reassign the string with a string of a different size. Static character arrays don't do that. They're also easier to pass around.
Also, character pointers are handy because they can be used to point to different statically allocated character arrays. Like this:
char *name;
char joe[] = "joe";
char bob[] = "bob";
name = joe;
printf("%s", name);
name = bob;
printf("%s", name);
This is what often happens when you pass a statically allocated array to a function taking a character pointer. For instance:
void strcpy(char *str1, char *str2);
If you then pass that:
char buffer[256];
strcpy(buffer, "This is a string, less than 256 characters.");
It will manipulate both of those through str1 and str2 which are just pointers that point to where buffer and the string literal are stored in memory.
Something to keep in mind when working in a function. If you have a function that returns a character pointer, don't return a pointer to a static character array allocated in the function. It will go out of scope and you'll have issues. Repeat, don't do this:
char *myFunc() {
char myBuf[64];
strcpy(myBuf, "hi");
return myBuf;
}
That won't work. You have to use a pointer and allocate memory (like shown earlier) in that case. The memory allocated will persist then, even when you pass out of the functions scope. Just don't forget to free it as previously mentioned.
This ended up a bit more encyclopedic than I'd intended, hope its helpful.
Editted to remove C++ code. I mix the two so often, I sometimes forget.
char* name is just a pointer. Somewhere along the line memory has to be allocated and the address of that memory stored in name.
It could point to a single byte of memory and be a "true" pointer to a single char.
It could point to a contiguous area of memory which holds a number of characters.
If those characters happen to end with a null terminator, low and behold you have a pointer to a string.
char *name, on it's own, can't hold any characters. This is important.
char *name just declares that name is a pointer (that is, a variable whose value is an address) that will be used to store the address of one or more characters at some point later in the program. It does not, however, allocate any space in memory to actually hold those characters, nor does it guarantee that name even contains a valid address. In the same way, if you have a declaration like int number there is no way to know what the value of number is until you explicitly set it.
Just like after declaring the value of an integer, you might later set its value (number = 42), after declaring a pointer to char, you might later set its value to be a valid memory address that contains a character -- or sequence of characters -- that you are interested in.
It is confusing indeed. The important thing to understand and distinguish is that char name[] declares array and char* name declares pointer. The two are different animals.
However, array in C can be implicitly converted to pointer to its first element. This gives you ability to perform pointer arithmetic and iterate through array elements (it does not matter elements of what type, char or not). As #which mentioned, you can use both, indexing operator or pointer arithmetic to access array elements. In fact, indexing operator is just a syntactic sugar (another representation of the same expression) for pointer arithmetic.
It is important to distinguish difference between array and pointer to first element of array. It is possible to query size of array declared as char name[15] using sizeof operator:
char name[15] = { 0 };
size_t s = sizeof(name);
assert(s == 15);
but if you apply sizeof to char* name you will get size of pointer on your platform (i.e. 4 bytes):
char* name = 0;
size_t s = sizeof(name);
assert(s == 4); // assuming pointer is 4-bytes long on your compiler/machine
Also, the two forms of definitions of arrays of char elements are equivalent:
char letters1[5] = { 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', '\0' };
char letters2[5] = "abcd"; /* 5th element implicitly gets value of 0 */
The dual nature of arrays, the implicit conversion of array to pointer to its first element, in C (and also C++) language, pointer can be used as iterator to walk through array elements:
/ *skip to 'd' letter */
char* it = letters1;
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
it++;
In C a string is actually just an array of characters, as you can see by the definition. However, superficially, any array is just a pointer to its first element, see below for the subtle intricacies. There is no range checking in C, the range you supply in the variable declaration has only meaning for the memory allocation for the variable.
a[x] is the same as *(a + x), i.e. dereference of the pointer a incremented by x.
if you used the following:
char foo[] = "foobar";
char bar = *foo;
bar will be set to 'f'
To stave of confusion and avoid misleading people, some extra words on the more intricate difference between pointers and arrays, thanks avakar:
In some cases a pointer is actually semantically different from an array, a (non-exhaustive) list of examples:
//sizeof
sizeof(char*) != sizeof(char[10])
//lvalues
char foo[] = "foobar";
char bar[] = "baz";
char* p;
foo = bar; // compile error, array is not an lvalue
p = bar; //just fine p now points to the array contents of bar
// multidimensional arrays
int baz[2][2];
int* q = baz; //compile error, multidimensional arrays can not decay into pointer
int* r = baz[0]; //just fine, r now points to the first element of the first "row" of baz
int x = baz[1][1];
int y = r[1][1]; //compile error, don't know dimensions of array, so subscripting is not possible
int z = r[1]: //just fine, z now holds the second element of the first "row" of baz
And finally a fun bit of trivia; since a[x] is equivalent to *(a + x) you can actually use e.g. '3[a]' to access the fourth element of array a. I.e. the following is perfectly legal code, and will print 'b' the fourth character of string foo.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
char foo[] = "foobar";
printf("%c\n", 3[foo]);
return 0;
}
One is an actual array object and the other is a reference or pointer to such an array object.
The thing that can be confusing is that both have the address of the first character in them, but only because one address is the first character and the other address is a word in memory that contains the address of the character.
The difference can be seen in the value of &name. In the first two cases it is the same value as just name, but in the third case it is a different type called pointer to pointer to char, or **char, and it is the address of the pointer itself. That is, it is a double-indirect pointer.
#include <stdio.h>
char name1[] = "fortran";
char *name2 = "fortran";
int main(void) {
printf("%lx\n%lx %s\n", (long)name1, (long)&name1, name1);
printf("%lx\n%lx %s\n", (long)name2, (long)&name2, name2);
return 0;
}
Ross-Harveys-MacBook-Pro:so ross$ ./a.out
100001068
100001068 fortran
100000f58
100001070 fortran