Hiding members in a C struct - c

I've been reading about OOP in C but I never liked how you can't have private data members like you can in C++. But then it came to my mind that you could create 2 structures. One is defined in the header file and the other is defined in the source file.
// =========================================
// in somestruct.h
typedef struct {
int _public_member;
} SomeStruct;
// =========================================
// in somestruct.c
#include "somestruct.h"
typedef struct {
int _public_member;
int _private_member;
} SomeStructSource;
SomeStruct *SomeStruct_Create()
{
SomeStructSource *p = (SomeStructSource *)malloc(sizeof(SomeStructSource));
p->_private_member = 42;
return (SomeStruct *)p;
}
From here you can just cast one structure to the other.
Is this considered bad practice? Or is it done often?

sizeof(SomeStruct) != sizeof(SomeStructSource). This will cause someone to find you and murder you someday.

Personally, I'd more like this:
typedef struct {
int _public_member;
/*I know you wont listen, but don't ever touch this member.*/
int _private_member;
} SomeStructSource;
It's C after all, if people want to screw up, they should be allowed to - no need to hide stuff, except:
If what you need is to keep the ABI/API compatible, there's 2 approaches that's more common from what I've seen.
Don't give your clients access to the struct, give them an opaque handle (a void* with a pretty name), provide init/destroy and accessor functions for everything. This makes sure you can change
the structure without even recompiling the clients if you're writing a library.
provide an opaque handle as part of your struct, which you can allocate however you like. This approach is even used in C++ to provide ABI compatibility.
e.g
struct SomeStruct {
int member;
void* internals; //allocate this to your private struct
};

You almost have it, but haven't gone far enough.
In the header:
struct SomeStruct;
typedef struct SomeStruct *SomeThing;
SomeThing create_some_thing();
destroy_some_thing(SomeThing thing);
int get_public_member_some_thing(SomeThing thing);
void set_public_member_some_thing(SomeThing thing, int value);
In the .c:
struct SomeStruct {
int public_member;
int private_member;
};
SomeThing create_some_thing()
{
SomeThing thing = malloc(sizeof(*thing));
thing->public_member = 0;
thing->private_member = 0;
return thing;
}
... etc ...
The point is, here now consumers have no knowledge of the internals of SomeStruct, and you can change it with impunity, adding and removing members at will, even without consumers needing to recompile. They also can't "accidentally" munge members directly, or allocate SomeStruct on the stack. This of course can also be viewed as a disadvantage.

I do not recommend using the public struct pattern. The correct design pattern, for OOP in C, is to provide functions to access every data, never allowing public access to data. The class data should be declared at the source, in order to be private, and be referenced in a forward manner, where Create and Destroy does allocation and free of the data. In a such way the public/private dilemma won't exist any more.
/*********** header.h ***********/
typedef struct sModuleData module_t'
module_t *Module_Create();
void Module_Destroy(module_t *);
/* Only getters and Setters to access data */
void Module_SetSomething(module_t *);
void Module_GetSomething(module_t *);
/*********** source.c ***********/
struct sModuleData {
/* private data */
};
module_t *Module_Create()
{
module_t *inst = (module_t *)malloc(sizeof(struct sModuleData));
/* ... */
return inst;
}
void Module_Destroy(module_t *inst)
{
/* ... */
free(inst);
}
/* Other functions implementation */
In the other side, if you do not want to use Malloc/Free (which can be unnecessary overhead for some situations) I suggest you hide the struct in a private file. Private members will be accessible, but that on user's stake.
/*********** privateTypes.h ***********/
/* All private, non forward, datatypes goes here */
struct sModuleData {
/* private data */
};
/*********** header.h ***********/
#include "privateTypes.h"
typedef struct sModuleData module_t;
void Module_Init(module_t *);
void Module_Deinit(module_t *);
/* Only getters and Setters to access data */
void Module_SetSomething(module_t *);
void Module_GetSomething(module_t *);
/*********** source.c ***********/
void Module_Init(module_t *inst)
{
/* perform initialization on the instance */
}
void Module_Deinit(module_t *inst)
{
/* perform deinitialization on the instance */
}
/*********** main.c ***********/
int main()
{
module_t mod_instance;
module_Init(&mod_instance);
/* and so on */
}

Never do that. If your API supports anything that takes SomeStruct as a parameter (which I'm expecting it does) then they could allocate one on a stack and pass it in. You'd get major errors trying to access the private member since the one the compiler allocates for the client class doesn't contain space for it.
The classic way to hide members in a struct is to make it a void*. It's basically a handle/cookie that only your implementation files know about. Pretty much every C library does this for private data.

Something similar to the method you've proposed is indeed used sometimes (eg. see the different varities of struct sockaddr* in the BSD sockets API), but it's almost impossible to use without violating C99's strict aliasing rules.
You can, however, do it safely:
somestruct.h:
struct SomeStructPrivate; /* Opaque type */
typedef struct {
int _public_member;
struct SomeStructPrivate *private;
} SomeStruct;
somestruct.c:
#include "somestruct.h"
struct SomeStructPrivate {
int _member;
};
SomeStruct *SomeStruct_Create()
{
SomeStruct *p = malloc(sizeof *p);
p->private = malloc(sizeof *p->private);
p->private->_member = 0xWHATEVER;
return p;
}

I'd write a hidden structure, and reference it using a pointer in the public structure. For example, your .h could have:
typedef struct {
int a, b;
void *private;
} public_t;
And your .c:
typedef struct {
int c, d;
} private_t;
It obviously doesn't protect against pointer arithmetic, and adds a bit of overhead for allocation/deallocation, but I guess it's beyond the scope of the question.

There are better ways to do this, like using a void * pointer to a private structure in the public struct. The way you are doing it you're fooling the compiler.

Use the following workaround:
#include <stdio.h>
#define C_PRIVATE(T) struct T##private {
#define C_PRIVATE_END } private;
#define C_PRIV(x) ((x).private)
#define C_PRIV_REF(x) (&(x)->private)
struct T {
int a;
C_PRIVATE(T)
int x;
C_PRIVATE_END
};
int main()
{
struct T t;
struct T *tref = &t;
t.a = 1;
C_PRIV(t).x = 2;
printf("t.a = %d\nt.x = %d\n", t.a, C_PRIV(t).x);
tref->a = 3;
C_PRIV_REF(tref)->x = 4;
printf("tref->a = %d\ntref->x = %d\n", tref->a, C_PRIV_REF(tref)->x);
return 0;
}
Result is:
t.a = 1
t.x = 2
tref->a = 3
tref->x = 4

I found that bit-field might be a good solution if you really want to hide something.
struct person {
unsigned long :64;
char *name;
int age;
};
struct wallet {
char *currency;
double balance;
};
The first member of struct person is an unnamed bit-field. used for a 64-bit pointer in this case. It's completely hidden and cannot be accessed by struct variable name.
Because of the first 64-bit in this struct is unused, so we can use it as a private pointer. We can access this member by its memory address instead of variable name.
void init_person(struct person* p, struct wallet* w) {
*(unsigned long *)p = (unsigned long)w;
// now the first 64-bit of person is a pointer of wallet
}
struct wallet* get_wallet(struct person* p) {
return (struct wallet*)*(unsigned long *)p;
}
A small working example, tested on my intel mac:
//
// Created by Rieon Ke on 2020/7/6.
//
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <assert.h>
#if __x86_64__ || __LP64__
#define PRIVATE_SET(obj, val) *(unsigned long *) obj = (unsigned long) val;
#define PRIVATE_GET(obj, type) (type)*(unsigned long *) obj;
#define PRIVATE_POINTER unsigned long:64
#else
#define PRIVATE_SET(obj, val) *(unsigned int *) obj = (unsigned int) val;
#define PRIVATE_GET(obj, type) (type)*(unsigned int *) obj;
#define PRIVATE_POINTER unsigned int:32
#endif
struct person {
PRIVATE_POINTER;
char *name;
int age;
};
struct wallet {
char *currency;
double balance;
};
int main() {
struct wallet w;
w.currency = strdup("$$");
w.balance = 99.9;
struct person p;
PRIVATE_SET(&p, &w) //set private member
p.name = strdup("JOHN");
p.age = 18;
struct wallet *pw = PRIVATE_GET(&p, struct wallet*) //get private member
assert(strcmp(pw->currency, "$$") == 0);
assert(pw->balance == 99.9);
free(w.currency);
free(p.name);
return 0;
}

This approach is valid, useful, standard C.
A slightly different approach, used by sockets API, which was defined by BSD Unix, is the style used for struct sockaddr.

My solution would be to provide only the prototype of the internal struct and then declare the definition in the .c file. Very useful to show C interface and use C++ behind.
.h :
struct internal;
struct foo {
int public_field;
struct internal *_internal;
};
.c :
struct internal {
int private_field; // could be a C++ class
};
Note: In that case, the variable have to be a pointer because the compiler is unable to know the size of the internal struct.

Not very private, given that the calling code can cast back to a (SomeStructSource *). Also, what happens when you want to add another public member? You'll have to break binary compatibility.
EDIT: I missed that it was in a .c file, but there really is nothing stopping a client from copying it out, or possibly even #includeing the .c file directly.

Related, though not exactly hiding.
Is to conditionally deprecate members.
Note that this works for GCC/Clang, but MSVC and other compilers can deprecate too,
so its possible to come up with a more portable version.
If you build with fairly strict warnings, or warnings as errors, this at least avoids accidental use.
// =========================================
// in somestruct.h
#ifdef _IS_SOMESTRUCT_C
# if defined(__GNUC__)
# define HIDE_MEMBER __attribute__((deprecated))
# else
# define HIDE_MEMBER /* no hiding! */
# endif
#else
# define HIDE_MEMBER
#endif
typedef struct {
int _public_member;
int _private_member HIDE_MEMBER;
} SomeStruct;
#undef HIDE_MEMBER
// =========================================
// in somestruct.c
#define _IS_SOMESTRUCT_C
#include "somestruct.h"
SomeStruct *SomeStruct_Create()
{
SomeStructSource *p = (SomeStructSource *)malloc(sizeof(SomeStructSource));
p->_private_member = 42;
return (SomeStruct *)p;
}

An anonymous struct can be of use here.
#ifndef MYSTRUCT_H
#define MYSTRUCT_H
typedef struct {
int i;
struct {
int j;
} MYSTRUCT_PRIVATE;
// NOTE: Avoid putting public members after private
int k;
} MyStruct;
void test_mystruct();
#endif
In any file that should have access to the private members, define MYSTRUCT_PRIVATE as an empty token before including this header. In those files, the private members are in an anonymous struct and can be accessed using m.j, but in all other places they can only be accessed using m.MYSTRUCT_PRIVATE.j.
#define MYSTRUCT_PRIVATE
#include "mystruct.h"
void test_mystruct() {
// Can access .j without MYSTRUCT_PRIVATE in both
// initializer and dot operator.
MyStruct m = { .i = 10, .j = 20, .k = 30 };
m.j = 20;
}
#include <stdio.h>
#include "mystruct.h"
int main() {
// You can declare structs and, if you jump through
// a small hoop, access private members
MyStruct m = { .i = 10, .k = 30 };
m.MYSTRUCT_PRIVATE.j = 20;
// This will not work
//MyStruct m2 = { .i = 10, .j = 20, .k = 30 };
// But this WILL work, be careful
MyStruct m3 = { 10, 20, 30 };
test_mystruct();
return 0;
}
I do not recommend putting public members after private members. Initializing a struct without member designators, such as with { 10, 20, 30 } can still initialize private members. If the number of private members changes, this will also silently break all initializers without member designators. It's probably best to always use member designators to avoid this.
You must design your structs, and especially the private members, to be zero initialized since there are no automatic constructors as in C++. As long as the members are initialized to 0 then they won't be left in an invalid state even without an initialization function. Barring a member designator initialization, initializing to simply { 0 } should be designed to be safe.
The only downside I've found is that this does mess with things like debuggers and code completion, they typically don't like it when one type has one set of members in one file, and a different set in another file.

Here's a very organized way to do it using macros. This is how I've seen it used in some of the big projects. I will assume the following:
Header file with the struct
Source file with access to private fields
Source file with no access to private fields (the fields exist but are renamed).
Header file:
// You can put this part in a header file
// and share it between multiple header files in your project
#ifndef ALLOW_PRIVATE_ACCESS
#define PRIVATE(T) private_##T
#else
#define PRIVATE(T) T
#endif
#define PUBLIC(T) T
typedef struct {
int PRIVATE(m1); // private member
int PUBLIC(m2); // public member
} mystruct;
mystruct *mystruct_create(void);
int mystruct_get_m1(mystruct *t);
Source file with access to private fields:
#include <stdlib.h>
#define ALLOW_PRIVATE_ACCESS
#include "mystruct.h"
mystruct *mystruct_create(void) {
mystruct *p = (mystruct *)malloc(sizeof(mystruct));
p->m1 = 42; // works (private)
p->m2 = 34; // works (public)
return (mystruct *)p;
}
int mystruct_get_m1(mystruct *t) {
return t->m1; // works (private)
}
Source file with no access to private fields:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include "mystruct.h"
int main() {
mystruct *t = mystruct_create();
printf("t->m1 = %d\n", t->m1); // error (private)
printf("t->m1 = %d\n", mystruct_get_m1(t)); // works (using function)
printf("t->m2 = %d\n", t->m2); // works (public)
free(t);
return 0;
}

Related

Change type of variable to point to a different struct

I have a struct that change a field's type based on a version (variable):
typedef struct __base {
char count[10];
void *entry[10];
} Base;
typedef struct __base_16 {
u_int16 count[10];
void *entry[10];
} Base16;
void main() {
/* version is computed at runtime based on some parameters */
if (version >= 2) {
Base *b = malloc(sizeof(Base));
} else {
Base16 *b = malloc(sizeof(Base16));
}
b->count[0] = 10;
b->count[1] = 20;
}
Of course this code doesn't compile, what are clean alternative to be able to access the struct without using a void pointer and casting every access to the fields?
Per my comment: If the version value can set using a #define read from a header file it might be an idiomatic way to do this, eg. #defines are commonly used to define variations in how objects are defined for large code base project. Using this method, the struct would be built only one way based on #ifdef sections that determine how the struct will be defined. This approach allows for a more generic name for your typedef, from which it follows your code would only have to reference one name for all instances of the struct
//in environment setting or header file
#define BASE_16
//in source .c, or in .h
#ifdef BASE_16
typedef struct {
u_int16 count[10];
void *entry[10];
} count_t;//common name for all definitions, allowing for
//simpler references in code that uses it
#endif
#ifdef BASE_8
typedef struct {
u_int8 count[10];
void *entry[10];
} count_t;
#endif
#ifdef BASE_32
typedef struct {
u_int32 count[10];
void *entry[10];
} count_t;
#endif
As I understand, you would like to execute code, which looks the same for variables which have significantly distinct types, and write this code only once while the variable type is recognized at runtime?
I do not think, it is possible in C. Processor must execute significantly different instructions, so it must be reflected in the C code. I would propose to put all that identical code in a function, which gets your ‘changing-type-variable’ as an argument. Then copy this function in editor, and just change its name and argument type. Like this:
void func(Base *b)
{
b->count[0] = 10;
b->count[1] = 20;
...
}
void func16(Base16 *b)
{
b->count[0] = 10;
b->count[1] = 20;
...
}
void main() {
/* version is computed at runtime based on some parameters */
if (version >= 2) {
Base *b = malloc(sizeof(Base));
func(b);
} else {
Base16 *b16 = malloc(sizeof(Base16));
func16(b16);
}
}
Let me do a remark: In somehow opposite case, when coding for different types must be applied to the same space in memory, union works very well, like e.g.:
union count
{
char CNTC[10];
u_int16 CNT16[10];
} Count;

Segmentation fault in cast struct in c

In an attempt to encapsulate struct members (in a similar way as discussed in this question), I created the code below.
In the code below, I have a c-struct, which contains methods to access members of the struct which are hidden (by being cast into a struct otherwise the same but without the hidden properties)
#include <stdio.h>
typedef struct class {
int publicValue;
int (*getPV)();
void (*setPV)(int newPV);
} class;
typedef struct classSource {
int publicValue;
int apv;
int (*getPV)();
void (*setPV)(int newPV);
int PV;
} classSource;
class class_init() {
classSource cs;
cs.publicValue = 15;
cs.PV = 8;
int class_getPV() {
return cs.PV;
};
void class_setPV(int x) {
cs.PV = x;
};
cs.getPV = class_getPV;
cs.setPV = class_setPV;
class *c = (class*)(&cs);
return *c;
}
int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) {
class c = class_init();
c.setPV(3452);
printf("%d", c.publicValue);
printf("%d", c.getPV());
return 0;
}
When I run this, I get a segmentation fault error. However, I noticed that if I comment out certain lines of code, it (seems) to work okay:
#include <stdio.h>
typedef struct class {
int publicValue;
int (*getPV)();
void (*setPV)(int newPV);
} class;
typedef struct classSource {
int publicValue;
int apv;
int (*getPV)();
void (*setPV)(int newPV);
int PV;
} classSource;
class class_init() {
classSource cs;
cs.publicValue = 15;
cs.PV = 8;
int class_getPV() {
return cs.PV;
};
void class_setPV(int x) {
cs.PV = x;
};
cs.getPV = class_getPV;
cs.setPV = class_setPV;
class *c = (class*)(&cs);
return *c;
}
int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) {
class c = class_init();
c.setPV(3452);
//printf("%d", c.publicValue);
printf("%d", c.getPV());
return 0;
}
I presume that it might have something to do with using the initializer to add the getter and setter methods to the struct, as those might overwrite memory.
Is what I am doing undefined behavior? Is there a way to fix this?
EDIT: With the help of the answer below, I have re-written the code. In case anyone wants to see the implementation, below is the revised code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
int pub;
} class;
typedef struct {
class public;
int PV;
} classSource;
int class_getPV(class *c) {
return ((classSource*)c)->PV;
}
void class_setPV(class *c, int newPV) {
((classSource*)c)->PV = newPV;
}
class *class_init() {
classSource *cs = malloc(sizeof(*cs));
if((void*)cs == (void*)NULL) {
printf("Error: malloc failed to allocate memory");
exit(1);
}
cs->public.pub = 10;
cs->PV = 8;
return &(cs->public);
}
int main() {
class *c = class_init();
class_setPV(c,4524);
printf("%d\n",class_getPV(c));
printf("%d\n",c->pub);
free(c);
return 0;
}
There are at least three separate problems in your code.
You don't actually have a "struct otherwise the same but without the hidden properties". Your class and classSource structs have their getPV and setPV members in different places. Internally member access boils down to byte offsets from the beginning of the struct. To have a fighting chance of working, your code would need to have a common initial prefix of members between the two struct types (i.e. get rid of int apv; or move it to the end).
You're returning a struct by value, which automatically makes a copy. You've reimplemented the object slicing problem: Because the return value has type class, only the members of class will be copied. The extra members of classSource have been "sliced off".
You're using nested functions. This is not a standard feature of C; GCC implements it as an extension and says:
If you try to call the nested function through its address after the containing function exits, all hell breaks loose.
This is exactly what's happening in your code: You're calling c.setPV(3452); and c.getPV after class_init has returned.
If you want to fix these problems, you'd have to:
Fix your struct definitions. At minimum all members of class need to appear at the beginning of classSource in the same order. Even if you do that, I'm not sure you wouldn't still run into undefined behavior (e.g. you might be violating an aliasing rule).
I'm somewhat sure that embedding one struct in the other would be OK, however:
typedef struct classSource {
class public;
int PV;
} classSource;
Now you can return &cs->public from your initializer, and your methods can cast the class * pointer back to classSource *. (I think this is OK because all struct pointers have the same size/representation, and X.public as the first member is guaranteed to have the same memory address as X.)
Change your code to use pointers instead. Returning a pointer to a struct avoids the slicing problem, but now you have to take care of memory management (malloc the struct and take care to free it later).
Don't use nested functions. Instead pass a pointer to the object to each method:
class *c = class_init();
c->setPV(c, 3452);
int x = c->getPV(c);
This is somewhat tedious, but this is what e.g. C++ does under the hood, essentially. Except C++ doesn't put function pointers in the objects themselves; there's no reason to when you can either use normal functions:
setPV(c, 3452);
int x = getPV(c);
... or use a separate (global, constant, singleton) struct that just stores pointers to methods (and no data). Each object then only contains a pointer to this struct of methods (this is known as a vtable):
struct classInterface {
void (*setPV)(class *, int);
int (*getPV)(const class *);
};
static const classInterface classSourceVtable = {
class_setPV, // these are normal functions, defined elsewhere
class_getPV
};
Method calls would look like this:
c->vtable->setPV(c, 1234);
int x = c->vtable->getPV(c);
But this is mainly useful if you have several different struct types that share a common public interface (class) and you want to write code that works uniformly on all of them.

Why and how would I protect struct members from direct manipulation in C

Let's say we have the following code in a .h file:
typedef struct
{
float velocity[2];
float position[2];
float rotation;
} Bullet;
void Bullet_init(Bullet *bullet, float position[2], float velocity[2], float rotation)
{
bullet->rotation = rotation;
bullet->velocity[0] = velocity[0];
bullet->velocity[1] = velocity[1];
bullet->position[0] = position[0];
bullet->position[1] = position[1];
return;
}
If a programmer includes this file in his code, couldn't he simply modify the struct directly with bullet.velocity[2] = 5 instead of using the Bullet_init function? Do we simply need to trust that the programmer will use the functions properly? In C++, you can just create a class with private members that can only be touched with member functions. This isn't that simple with C. Does it even matter?
In C you have to either trust the programmer or make the struct definition not be part of a public interface.
You could for example have (in a header file):
typedef struct some_struct some_struct;
int some_struct_get_member(some_struct * ptr);
void some_struct_set_memember(some_struct * ptr, int newValue);
And then in your .c file:
#include <assert.h>
struct some_struct { int member; };
int some_struct_get_member(struct some_struct * ptr) {
assert(ptr);
return ptr->member;
}
void some_struct_set_member(struct some_struct * ptr, int newValue) {
assert(ptr);
ptr->member = newValue;
}
As for why you might do this, if the struct has complicated internal requirements having it so that only a limited interface manipulates those internals helps ensure that the values always make sense.

Complete encapsulation without malloc

I was experimenting with C11 and VLAs, trying to declare a struct variable on the stack with only an incomplete declaration. The objective is to provide a mechanism to create a variable of some struct type without showing the internals (like the PIMPL idiom) but without the need to create the variable on the heap and return a pointer to it. Also, if the struct layout changes, I don't want to recompile every file that uses the struct.
I have managed to program the following:
private.h:
#ifndef PRIVATE_H_
#define PRIVATE_H_
typedef struct A{
int value;
}A;
#endif /* PRIVATE_H_ */
public.h:
#ifndef PUBLIC_H_
#define PUBLIC_H_
typedef struct A A;
size_t A_getSizeOf(void);
void A_setValue(A * a, int value);
void A_printValue(A * a);
#endif /* PUBLIC_H_ */
implementation.c:
#include "private.h"
#include "stdio.h"
size_t A_getSizeOf(void)
{
return sizeof(A);
}
void A_setValue(A * a, int value)
{
a->value = value;
}
void A_printValue(A * a)
{
printf("%d\n", a->value);
}
main.c:
#include <stdalign.h>
#include <stddef.h>
#include "public.h"
#define createOnStack(type, variable) \
alignas(max_align_t) char variable ## _stack[type ## _getSizeOf()]; \
type * variable = (type *)&variable ## _stack
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
createOnStack(A, var);
A_setValue(var, 5335);
A_printValue(var);
}
I have tested this code and it seems to work. However I'm not sure if I'm overlooking something (like aliasing, alignment or something like that) that could be dangerous or unportable, or could hurt performance. Also I want to know if there are better (portable) solutions to this problem in C.
This of course violates the effective typing rules (aka strict aliasing) because the C language does not allow an object of tye char [] to be accessed through a pointer that does not have that type (or a compatible one).
You could disable strict aliasing analysis via compiler flags like -fno-strict-aliasing or attributes like
#ifdef __GNUC__
#define MAY_ALIAS __attribute__((__may_alias__))
#else
#define MAY_ALIAS
#endif
(thanks go to R.. for pointing out the latter), but even if you do not do so, in practice everything should work just fine as long as you only ever use the variable's proper name to initialize the typed pointer.
Personally, I'd simplify your declarations to something along the lines of
#define stackbuffer(NAME, SIZE) \
_Alignas (max_align_t) char NAME[SIZE]
typedef struct Foo Foo;
extern const size_t SIZEOF_FOO;
stackbuffer(buffer, SIZEOF_FOO);
Foo *foo = (void *)buffer;
The alternative would be using the non-standard alloca(), but that 'function' comes with its own set of issues.
I am considering adopting a strategy similar to the following to solve essentially the same problem. Perhaps it will be of interest despite being a year late.
I wish to prevent clients of a struct from accessing the fields directly, in order to make it easier to reason about their state and easier to write reliable design contracts. I'd also prefer to avoid allocating small structures on the heap. But I can't afford a C11 public interface - much of the joy of C is that almost any code knows how to talk to C89.
To that end, consider the adequate application code:
#include "opaque.h"
int main(void)
{
opaque on_the_stack = create_opaque(42,3.14); // constructor
print_opaque(&on_the_stack);
delete_opaque(&on_the_stack); // destructor
return 0;
}
The opaque header is fairly nasty, but not completely absurd. Providing both create and delete functions is mostly for the sake of consistency with structs where calling the destructor actually matters.
/* opaque.h */
#ifndef OPAQUE_H
#define OPAQUE_H
/* max_align_t is not reliably available in stddef, esp. in c89 */
typedef union
{
int foo;
long long _longlong;
unsigned long long _ulonglong;
double _double;
void * _voidptr;
void (*_voidfuncptr)(void);
/* I believe the above types are sufficient */
} alignment_hack;
#define sizeof_opaque 16 /* Tedious to keep up to date */
typedef struct
{
union
{
char state [sizeof_opaque];
alignment_hack hack;
} private;
} opaque;
#undef sizeof_opaque /* minimise the scope of the macro */
void print_opaque(opaque * o);
opaque create_opaque(int foo, double bar);
void delete_opaque(opaque *);
#endif
Finally an implementation, which is welcome to use C11 as it's not the interface. _Static_assert(alignof...) is particularly reassuring. Several layers of static functions are used to indicate the obvious refinement of generating the wrap/unwrap layers. Pretty much the entire mess is amenable to code gen.
#include "opaque.h"
#include <stdalign.h>
#include <stdio.h>
typedef struct
{
int foo;
double bar;
} opaque_impl;
/* Zero tolerance approach to letting the sizes drift */
_Static_assert(sizeof (opaque) == sizeof (opaque_impl), "Opaque size incorrect");
_Static_assert(alignof (opaque) == alignof (opaque_impl), "Opaque alignment incorrect");
static void print_opaque_impl(opaque_impl *o)
{
printf("Foo = %d and Bar = %g\n",o->foo,o->bar);
}
static void create_opaque_impl(opaque_impl * o, int foo, double bar)
{
o->foo = foo;
o->bar = bar;
}
static void create_opaque_hack(opaque * o, int foo, double bar)
{
opaque_impl * ptr = (opaque_impl*)o;
create_opaque_impl(ptr,foo,bar);
}
static void delete_opaque_impl(opaque_impl *o)
{
o->foo = 0;
o->bar = 0;
}
static void delete_opaque_hack(opaque * o)
{
opaque_impl * ptr = (opaque_impl*)o;
delete_opaque_impl(ptr);
}
void print_opaque(opaque * o)
{
return print_opaque_impl((opaque_impl*)o);
}
opaque create_opaque(int foo, double bar)
{
opaque tmp;
unsigned int i;
/* Useful to zero out padding */
for (i=0; i < sizeof (opaque_impl); i++)
{
tmp.private.state[i] = 0;
}
create_opaque_hack(&tmp,foo,bar);
return tmp;
}
void delete_opaque(opaque *o)
{
delete_opaque_hack(o);
}
The drawbacks I can see myself:
Changing the size define manually would be irritating
The casting should hinder optimisation (I haven't checked this yet)
This may violate strict pointer aliasing. Need to re-read the spec.
I am concerned about accidentally invoking undefined behaviour. I would also be interested in general feedback on the above, or whether it looks like a credible alternative to the inventive VLA technique in the question.

Good Coding Practice With C structs?

In C, you can define structures to hold an assortment of variables;
typedef struct {
float sp;
float K; // interactive form - for display only
float Ti; // values are based in seconds
float Td;
} pid_data_t;
But lets say that K, Ti, and Td should never be set publicly, and should only be used for storing the values after they have been manipulated. So, I want these values not to be updated by;
pid_data_t = pid_data;
pid_data.K = 10; // no good! changing K should be done via a function
I want them to be set via a function;
int8_t pid_set_pid_params(float new_K_dash, float new_Ti_dash,
float new_Td_dash)
{
… // perform lots of things
pid_data->K = new_K_dash;
pid_data->Ti = new_Ti_dash;
pid_data->Td = new_Td_dash;
}
Any thoughts on this? I know C++ uses like a get/set property, but was wondering what people might do on C.
Your public interface should only offer an opaque pointer (maybe DATA*, or data_handle), as well as handler functions create_data(), set_data_value(), read_data_value(), free_data(), etc., which operate on the opaque pointer.
Much like FILE*.
Just don't give your clients the internal header files :-)
// library.h
typedef struct data_t * data_handle;
data_handle create_data();
void free_data(data_handle);
Private implementation (don't ship):
#include "library.h"
struct data_t
{
/* ... */
};
data_handle create_data() { return malloc(sizeof(struct data_t)); }
void free_data(data_handle h) { free(h); }
/* etc. etc. */
in C, by convention....
for OO C like this...
I'd have a pid_data_create(&data) // initializes your struct
and pid_data_set_proportional_gain(&data, 0.1);
etc...
so basically achieving a C++ ish class... prefix all functions with the "class" / "struct" name and always pass the struct * as the first parameter.
also, it should store function pointers for polymorphisim, and you shouldn't call those function pointers directly, again, have a function that takes your struct as a parameter, and then the can make the function pointer call (can check for nulls, fake inheritance/virtual functions, and other stuff)
The canonical way to do this is by using a combination of opaque pointers and public structs, along with allocators, getters and setters for the private elements. About along these lines:
foo.h
typedef struct Foo {
/* public elements */
} Foo;
Foo *new_Foo(void);
void Foo_something_opaque(Foo* foo);
foo.c
#include "foo.h"
typedef struct Private_Foo_ {
struct Foo foo;
/* private elements */
} Private_Foo_;
Foo *new_Foo(void)
{
Private_Foo_ *foo = malloc(sizeof(Private_Foo_));
/* initialize private and public elements */
return (Foo*) foo;
}
void Foo_something_opaque(Foo *foo)
{
Private_Foo_ *priv_foo = (Private_Foo_*) foo;
/* do something */
}
This woks, because C guarantees, that the address of a struct variable always is equal to the address of the very first struct element. We can use this to have a Private_Foo_ struct, containing a public Foo at the beginning, giving out pointers to the whole thing, with the compilation units not having access to the Private_Foo_ struct defintion just seeing some memory without any context.
It should be noted that C++ works quite similar behind the curtains.
Update
As KereekSB pointed out, this will break if used in a array.
I say: Then don't make Foo f[], however tempting, but make an arrays of pointers to Foo: Foo *f[].
If one really insists on using it in arrays do the following:
foo_private.h
typedef struct Private_Foo_ {
/* private elements */
} Private_Foo_;
static size_t Private_Foo_sizeof(void) { return sizeof(Private_Foo_); }
foo_private.h is written in a way, that it can be compiled into an object file. Use some helper program to link it and use the result of Private_Foo_sizeof() to generate the actual, plattform dependent foo.h from some foo.h.in file.
foo.h
#include
#define FOO_SIZEOF_PRIVATE_ELEMENTS <generated by preconfigure step>
typedef struct Foo_ {
/* public elements */
char reserved[FOO_SIZEOF_PRIVATE_ELEMENTS];
} Foo;
Foo *new_Foo(void);
void Foo_something_opaque(Foo* foo);
foo.c
#include "foo.h"
#include "foo_private.h"
Foo *new_Foo(void)
{
Foo *foo = malloc(sizeof(Foo));
/* initialize private and public elements */
return (Foo*) foo;
}
void Foo_something_opaque(Foo *foo)
{
Private_Foo_ *priv_foo = (Private_Foo_*) foo.reserved;
/* do something */
}
IMHO this is really messy. Now I'm a fan of smart containers (unfortunately there's no standard container library for C). Anyway: In such a container is creates through a function like
Array *array_alloc(size_t sizeofElement, unsigned int elements);
void *array_at(Array *array, unsigned int index);
/* and all the other functions expected of arrays */
See the libowfaw for an example of such an implementation. Now for the type Foo it was trivial to provide a function
Array *Foo_array(unsigned int count);
Object orientation is a way of thinking and modelling, data encapsulation where struct data should not be modified directly by the user can be implemented this way:
my_library.h
#ifndef __MY_LIBRARY__
#define __MY_LIBRARY__
typedef void MiObject;
MyObject* newMyObject();
void destroyMyObject(MyObject*)
int setMyObjectProperty1(MyObject*,someDataType1*);
/*Return a pointer to the data/object, classic pass by value */
someDataType1* getMyObjectProperty2Style1(MyObject*);
int setMyObjectProperty2(MyObject*,someDataType2*);
/* The data/object is passed through reference */
int getMyObjectProperty2Style2(MyObject*,someDataType2**);
/* Some more functions here */
#endif
my_library.c
struct _MyHiddenDataType{
int a;
char* b;
..
..
};
MyObject* newMyObject(){
struct _MyHiddenData* newData = (struct _MyHiddenData*)malloc(sizeof(struct _MyHiddenData);
//check null, etc
//initialize data, etc
return (MyObject*)newData;
}
int setMyObjectProperty1(MyObject* object,someDataType1* somedata){
struct _MyHiddenData* data = (struct _MyHiddenData*)object;
//check for nulls, and process somedata
data->somePropery=somedata;
}
someDataType1* getMyObjectProperty2Style1(MyObject*){
struct _MyHiddenData* data = (struct _MyHiddenData*)object;
//check for nulls, and process somedata
return data->someProperty;
}
/* Similar code for the rest */
And this way you have encapsulated the struct properties as if they were private. On the same manner static functions inside my_libray.c would behave as private functions. Get a good look at C and you'll see, that your imagination is the limit to what you can do.

Resources