Initialize structures without defining members of structure - C - c

I am trying to decipher someone's code and I see something that I don't understand. I don't see any references on how structures are applied when members aren't defined in the header or in the beginning of code but are defined later on.. Here is an example of what I am trying to figure out. I noted that Data_t *data; in the header is not defined until we enter the funky function and my compiler errors out on this line. I guess my question would be -- is this a valid way to input data into structures?
Much thanks!
#include <stdio.h>
typedef struct config{
int a;
int b;
int c;
Data_t *data;
} config_t;
int funky(config_t *config);
int main( void )
{
printf("In main()\n");
config_t config;
funky(&config);
printf("a = %d\n", config.a); //accessing config's a member
return 0;
}
int funky(config_t *config)
{
printf("In funky()\n");
Data_t *dataa = config->data;
for(i=0;i<5;i++){
dataa[i].mem1=i;
dataa[i].mem2=4+i;
}
//Set values
config->a = 1;
printf("a = %d\n", config->a); //pointer to config's a member
return 0;
}

The definition of Data_t doesn't appear in your code, which is what's causing the compile error.
Also - to your specific question, that code is dereferencing an uninitialized pointer, which causes undefined behaviour. Initialize the data field in the config structure in main, or you're going to be in trouble. This block of code:
Data_t *dataa = config->data;
for(i=0;i<5;i++){
dataa[i].mem1=i;
dataa[i].mem2=4+i;
}
Is the bad stuff - as you can see, it copies the unitialized pointer out and tries to access memory through it.
The code after that:
//Set values
config->a = 1;
Is fine, and a totally reasonable way to initialize a structure.

Related

Accessing the nested Structural Elements

#include<stdio.h>
struct a
{
float n;
int e;
};
struct b
{
struct a *c;
}h;
int main()
{
h.c->n=4;
printf("%f",h.c->n);
return 0;
}
Yes it is small code but I have been trying to access the element e which is instruct a through the struct b. The code is compiled without any error but in the output screen, it is blank.
Please suggest me a good way to access the element in the struct a.
Please note that the struct a has been declared inside the struct b as a pointer.
This would crash because your pointer c was never allocated.
h.c->n=4; // pointer `c` has not been pointing to anything valid
To make it work, you need something like this:
struct a aa; // must allocate an item of struct `a` first
aa.n = 4;
aa.e = 0;
h.c = &aa; // then make pointer `c` to point that that item
printf("%f",h.c->n); // before trying to access that pointer

How to fix allocated memory from a struct hack in a different method?

I'm developing a driver in C for communication and the messages exchanged don't have a fixed size. The recommendation of communication bus is to use structs for multi-topics, which is also my case.
My 1st problem: I have to keep listening for new messages, and when I get one I have to process message data (it has a delay) and still listening for new messages.
1st solution: using thread when got new messages to process data.
My 2nd problem: Data in message can have multiple data of a struct, and my communicator requires using a struct to organize this multiple values.
2nd solution: using struct hack to allocate memory dynamic size of struct.
My current problem: when I'd pass my struct as argument to the thread, or any function, I'm loosing data structure and getting wrong values.
A short test which a made is:
typedef struct test{
int size;
int value[];
} test;
void allocation(test *v){
test *aux = (test *)malloc(sizeof(test)+3*sizeof(int));
int i;
aux->value[0] = 2;
aux->size = 3;
aux->value[1] = 1;
aux->value[2] = 5;
printf("Teste1 %d\n",aux->size);
for(i=0; i < aux->size; i++){
printf("%d\n", aux->value[i]);
}
*v = *aux;
}
void cleanup(test *v){
free(v);
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){
test v;
int i;
allocation(&v);
printf("Teste2 %d\n",v.size);
for(i=0; i < v.size; i++){
printf("%d\n", v.value[i]);
}
//cleanup(&v);
return 0;
}
In this test I got right values in first print and wrong values in second (only v.size is giving a right value).
And my struct is a little more complex than that in test. My struct is like:
typedef struct test1{
double v1;
double v2;
} test1;
typedef struct test2{
int size;
test1 values[];
} test2;
Do you know how to fix my memory struct in that function, once I have all elements necessary to fix? Please, keep in mind that is desirable (not required) that I could also allocate multiple test2 data.
The thing here is that you assign structs with incomplete member int value[]; Though it is in principle OK to copy two structs by value (and this is actually what happens if you write *v = *aux); However, as the compiler does not know which size member value[] will take on at runtime, the "sizeof" of v as well as the size of *aux is always 4, i.e. the known size of the one int member size. Hence, only this is copied, whereas the value[]-array simply gets not copied.
A way out out this situation would be require a pointer to a pointer (i.e. allocation(test **v), such that the memory reserved can be directly assigned to it, using a pointer to struct test in main, i.e. test *vptr, and call allocation(&vptr).
If you cannot avoid passing a reverence to the value (instead of a reference to a pointer to the value), I suppose you'll have to use memcpy to transfer the contents. But this does actually not make sense, because then the receiver must provide enough space to take on the value[]-array in advance (which is not the case if you simple declare a variable of the form test v). An then the malloc and the aux would make no sense; you could directly write into object v passed by reference.
You are declaring v as non-pointer, meaning that the memory is already allocated for v when you declare it in main. Sending the reference to your allocation only copies the size correctly since it is not dynamically allocated. Correct way to do this would be to:
Declare your v as pointer
Make your allocation return test* (test* allocation())
Assign it to v in main. i.e. something like v = allocate()
And use v like a pointer from then on
EDIT: Since OP wants this to work only as arguments, best way to go about it is using double pointer. Check the following code:
typedef struct test{
int size;
int value[];
} test;
void allocation(test **v){
test *aux = (test *)malloc(sizeof(test)+3*sizeof(int));
int i;
aux->value[0] = 2;
aux->size = 3;
aux->value[1] = 1;
aux->value[2] = 5;
printf("Teste1 %d\n",aux->size);
for(i=0; i < aux->size; i++){
printf("%d\n", aux->value[i]);
}
*v = aux;
}
void cleanup(test *v){
free(v);
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){
test **v;
v = malloc (sizeof (test*));
int i;
allocation(v);
printf("Teste2 %d\n",(*v)->size);
for(i=0; i < (*v)->size; i++){
printf("%d\n", (*v)->value[i]);
}
//cleanup(&v);
return 0;
}
Please note that your cleanup will change too after this.

User defined types with dynamic size in C

I want to define a new data type consisting of an array with a size inputted by the user. For example if the user inputs 128, then my program should make a new type which is basically an array of 16 bytes. This structure's definition needs to be global since I am going to use that type thereafter in my program. It is necessary to have a dynamic size for this structure because I will have a HUGE database populated by that type of variables in the end.
The code I have right now is:
struct user_defined_integer;
.
.
.
void def_type(int num_bits)
{
extern struct user_defined_integer
{
int val[num_bits/sizeof(int)];
};
return;
}
(which is not working)
The closest thing to my question, I have found, is in here:
I need to make a global array in C with a size inputted by the user
(Which is not helpful)
Is there a way to do this, so that my structure is recognized in the whole file?
When doing:
extern struct user_defined_integer
{
int val[num_bits/sizeof(int)];
};
You should get the warning:
warning: useless storage class specifier in empty declaration
because you have an empty declaration. extern does not apply to user_defined_integer, but rather the variable that comes after it. Secondly, this won't work anyway because a struct that contains a variable length array can't have any linkage.
error: object with variably modified type must have no linkage
Even so, variable length arrays allocate storage at the point of declaration. You should instead opt for dynamic memory.
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct
{
int num_bits;
int* val;
} user_defined_integer;
void set_val(user_defined_integer* udi, int num_bits)
{
udi->num_bits = num_bits;
udi->val = malloc(num_bits/sizeof(int));
}
What you need is a VLA member, as asked about here. Basically, you declare a struct with a size field and one element's worth of storage as last member, and over-allocate it.
Imported from that question :
typedef struct Bitmapset {
int nwords;
uint32 words[1];
} Bitmapset;
Bitmapset *allocate(int n) {
Bitmapset *p = malloc(offsetof(Bitmapset, words) + n * sizeof *p->words);
p->nwords = n;
return p;
}
I want to define a new data type consisting of an array with a size inputted by the user. For example if the user inputs 128, then my program should make a new type which is basically an array of 16 bytes.
This is not possible in C, because C types are a compile-time thing and don't exist at all at run-time.
However, with a C99 conforming compiler, you might use flexible array member. You'll need a struct containing some members and ending with an array without any given dimension, e.g.
struct my_flex_st {
unsigned size;
int arr[]; // of size elements
};
Here is a way to allocate it:
struct my_flex_st *make_flex(unsigned siz) {
struct my_flex_st* ptr
= malloc(sizeof(struct my_flex_st) + siz * sizeof(int));
if (!ptr) { perror("malloc my_flex_st"); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); };
ptr->size = siz;
memset (ptr->arr, 0, siz*sizeof(int));
return ptr;
}
Don't forget to free it once you don't use it anymore.
Of course, you'll need to use pointers in your code. If you really want to have a global variable, declare it as e.g.
extern struct my_flex_st* my_glob_ptr;
Try this method-
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<limits.h>
struct user_defined_integer
{
int *val;
}user_int;
void memory_allocate(int num_bit)
{
int result;
result = (num_bit+CHAR_BIT-1)/CHAR_BIT; // since 8 bit =1 byte
user_int.val=malloc(result*sizeof(int));
if(user_int.val == NULL){
printf("Failed to allocate memory\n");
return ;
}
else
printf("Allocated %d bytes for val\n",result);
}
int main()
{
int num_bit;
printf("Enter the number of bits\n");
scanf("%d",&num_bit);
memory_allocate(num_bit);
// do your stuff here
free(user_int.val); // free the memory at the end;
return 0;
}

Kind of polymorphism in C

I'm writing a C program in which I define two types:
typedef struct {
uint8_t array[32];
/* struct A's members */
...
} A;
typedef struct {
uint8_t array[32];
/* struct B's members, different from A's */
...
} B;
Now I would like to build a data structure which is capable of managing both types without having to write one for type A and one for type B, assuming that both have a uint8_t [32] as their first member.
I read how to implement a sort of polymorphism in C here and I also read here that the order of struct members is guaranteed to be kept by the compiler as written by the programmer.
I came up with the following idea, what if I define the following structure:
typedef struct {
uint8_t array[32];
} Element;
and define a data structure which only deals with data that have type Element? Would it be safe to do something like:
void f(Element * e){
int i;
for(i = 0; i < 32; i++) do_something(e->array[i]);
}
...
A a;
B b;
...
f(((Element *)&a));
...
f(((Element *)&b));
At a first glance it looks unclean, but I was wondering whether there are any guarantees that it will not break?
If array is always the first in your struct, you can simply access it by casting pointers. There is no need for a struct Element. You data structure can store void pointers.
typedef struct {
char array[32];
} A;
typedef struct {
void* elements;
size_t elementSize;
size_t num;
} Vector;
char* getArrayPtr(Vector* v, int i) {
return (char*)(v->elements) + v->elementSize*i;
}
int main()
{
A* pa = malloc(10*sizeof(A));
pa[3].array[0] = 's';
Vector v;
v.elements = pa;
v.num = 10;
v.elementSize = sizeof(A);
printf("%s\n", getArrayPtr(&v, 3));
}
but why not have a function that works with the array directly
void f(uint8_t array[32]){
int i;
for(i = 0; i < 32; i++) do_something(array[i]);
}
and call it like this
f(a.array)
f(b.array)
polymorphism makes sense when you want to kepp
a and b in a container of some sorts
and you want to iterate over them but you dont want to care that they are different types.
This should work fine if you, you know, don't make any mistakes. A pointer to the A struct can be cast to a pointer to the element struct, and so long as they have a common prefix, access to the common members will work just fine.
A pointer to the A struct, which is then cast to a pointer to the element struct can also be cast back to a pointer to the A struct without any problems. If element struct was not originally an A struct, then casting the pointer back to A will be undefined behavior. And this you will need to manage manually.
One gotcha (that I've run into) is, gcc will also allow you to cast the struct back and forth (not just pointer to struct) and this is not supported by the C standard. It will appear to work fine until your (my) friend tries to port the code to a different compiler (suncc) at which point it will break. Or rather, it won't even compile.

Variable-length array in file scope?

I have this code for example.
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#define array_size 3
typedef struct {
int array[array_size];
} TEST;
void printout(TEST *p, int element) {
printf("element: %i\n", p->array[element]);
}
int main(void) {
TEST *p;
p = malloc(sizeof(TEST));
p->array[0] = 5;
printout(p, 0);
return 0;
}
But I'd like to assign "array_size" based on user input.
If I try to do so, the compiler says "variably modified ‘array_size’ at file scope". So, am I right that the only way to do what I want is to move everything to main()..?
It works just fine, but keeping structs and functions declarations in file scope seems, you know, neat.
The simplest approach is to just allocate the memory dynamically:
typedef struct {
int *array;
size_t size;
} TEST;
int main() {
size_t elem_count = /* from user input */
TEST p;
p->array = malloc(elem_count * sizeof int);
if(!p->array)
return -1;
p->size = elem_count;
/* ... */
free(p->array);
}
You can indeed not define a variable length array at file scope, you can however define a pointer at file scope and malloc it, just define a global pointer int* p = NULL; (lose the whole TEST stuff) and p = malloc(sizeof(int) * input_size); simply access with p[x].
For completeness, you can also use the so called flexible array member defined in C99:
From ISO/IEC 9899:1999, Section 6.7.2.1, paragraph 16:
As a special case, the last element of a structure with more than one
named member may have an incomplete array type; this is called a
flexible array member.
typedef struct {
other_type other_data
int array[];
} TEST;
...
TEST *p = malloc(sizeof(TEST) + sizeof(int) * input_size);
Though note that this is limited to a single member, you could make an array of structs if you would otherwise have multiple arrays of different types but the same length.
This was originally intended mostly for data with headers such as ofter encountered in file and/or network I/O.

Resources