Why does the following have the effect it does - it prints a terminal full of random characters and then exits leaving a command prompt that produces garbage when you type in it. (I tried it because I thought it would produce a seg fault).
#include <stdio.h>
int main(){
char* s = "lololololololol";
while(1){
printf("%c", *s);
s++;
}
}
it was compiled with:
gcc -std=c99 hello.c
It will eventually seg fault, but before that it'll print out whatever bytes are in the same page. That's why you see random chars on the screen.
Those may well include escape sequences to change (say) the character encoding of the console. That's why you end up with gibberish when you type on the console after it's exited, too.
Because you have an infinite loop (while(1)), and you keep getting the current value of pointer (*s), and then moving the pointer one char forward (s++). This has the effect of marching well past the end of the string into "garbage" (uninitialized memory), which gets printed to the console as a result.
In addition to what everyone else said in regards to you ignoring the string terminal character and just printing willy-nilly what's in memory past the string, the reason why your command prompt is also "garbage" is that by printing a particular "unprintable" character, your terminal session was left in a strange character mode. (I don't know which character it is or what mode change it does, but maybe someone else can pipe in about it that knows better than I.)
You are just printing out what is in memory because your loop doesn't stop at the end of the string. Each random byte is interpreted as a character. It will seg fault when you reach the end of the memory page (and get into unreadable territory).
Expanding ever so slightly on the answers given here (which are all excellent) ... I ran into this more than once myself when I was just beginning with C, and it's an easy mistake to make.
A quick tweak to your while loop will fix it. Everyone else has given you the why, I'll hook you up with the how:
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
char *s = "lolololololololol";
while (*s != '\0') {
printf("%c", *s);
s++;
}
}
Note that instead of an infinite loop (while(1)), we're doing a loop check to ensure that the pointer we're pulling isn't the null-terminator for the string, thus avoiding the overrun you're encountering.
If you're stuck absolutely needing while(1) (for example, if this is homework and the instructor wants you to use it), use the break keyword to exit the loop. The following code smells, at least to me, but it works:
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
char *s = "lolololololololol";
while (1) {
if (*s == '\0')
break;
printf("%c", *s);
s++;
}
}
Both produce the same console output, with no line break at the end:
lolololololololol
Your loop doesn't terminate, so println prints whatever is in the memory after the text you write; eventually it will access memory it is not allowed to read, causing it to segfault.
You can change the loop as the others suggested, or you can take advantage of fact that in c, zero is false and null (which terminates all strings) is also zero, so you can construct the loop as:
while (*s) {
Rather than:
while (*s != '\0')
The first one may be more difficult to understand, but it does have the advantage of brevity so it is often used to save a bit of typing.
Also, you can usually get back to your command prompt by using the 'reset' command, typing blindly of course. (type Enter, reset, Enter)
Related
I cannot understand when does the putchar line is being executed and how it's helping to reverse the input lines ? If EOF occurs the return statement gets executed , but what happens after that line ?
#include<stdio.h>
int fun_reverse();
void main(){
fun_reverse();
}
int fun_reverse(){
int ch ;
ch = getchar();
if(ch==EOF)
return;
fun_reverse();
putchar(ch);
}
every time you're calling fun_reverse in your fun_reverse function, it doesn't print the inputted char immediately, just asks for input for another one, piling on the requests (and creating as much local variables storing each char) until EOF is reached.
When EOF is encountered, fun_reverse returns without calling fun_reverse again, ending the chain, making all callers return and eventually print the results.
The fact that the calls have been piled on due to recursion has the effect of reversing the output, because unpiling them is done the other way round.
This technique is often used to convert a number to string without any extra buffer. Converting a number to string gives the "wrong" end of the number first, so you have to buffer the numbers until the number digits are fully processed. A similar algorithm as the one above allows to store the digits and print them in the readable order.
Though your question is already been answered I would suggest you to read about 'head recursion' and 'tail recursion'.
Have a look at accepted answer of this question.
I was just wondering if you could clear something up for me.
Let's have some example code to explain my question:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
char test[100];
printf("%s",test);
return 0;
}
If I am not totally mistaken, this should output randomly either some character that was at this memory address before I declared it or nothing if it was empty like in a virtual environment. So, this is my understanding. The memory held before I put something in is understood as a char and written to the terminal. For instance ascii 'a' = 97 = 01100001. That's why it outputs 'a'. Could have been anything else. Or nothing. And then it stops.
But if I put 'a' in the first position and then print it like this:
test[0] = 'a'
printf("%s",test);
It will output 'a' and additionally to that some character or nothing and then stop.
This is how I understand arrays: An array is a pointer to the first address and the brackets are a dereferences of the address after adding the number times sizeof(type) to it.
So, in that case, the random 01100001 (Ascii 'a') found in the memory in the first example should be indistinguishable for printf from the deliberately placed 01100001 (Ascii 'a') in the second example. Yet, when I run printf, I don't get 100 random outputs. I get one. And I don't assume random fields are in general set to '\0'.
Which means, my understanding must be wrong somewhere. Please help me understand where I make my mistake.
It doesn't, it's undefined behavior. Your program just accidentally prints the un"expected" value.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
char test[100];
printf("%s",test);
return 0;
}
You can't expect the code above to do anything predictable, it might print something, it could segfault, there is no way to predict what will actually happen because the behavior of such program is strictly undefined.
I'm trying to arrange this character array that only contains digits,it prints the same array with the order I input it without any change , i tried using type casting in the if statement, it gave me correct results when running but it wasn't accepted by the online judge.what is the fault here and why isn't my second solution accepted?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int main() {
char x[101];
scanf("%s",x);
int l,i,j ;
l = strlen(x);
char temp ;
for(i=0;x[i];i++)
{
for( j=i ; x[j] ; j++){
if('x[j]'<'x[i]') //(int)x[j] and (int)x[i] didn't work on the
//online judge
{
temp=x[i];
x[i]=x[j];
x[j]=temp;
}
}
}
printf("%s",x);
return 0 ;
}
I have no idea why there are quotes around the array elements, but that is not doing what you think, the comparison is happening because a multicharacter string is evaluated to an integer value which is implementation defined, hence the if statement is always comparing the same values, which means that it will always give the same result, you need to remove the quotes
if (x[j] < x[i])
Also, i'd recommend specifying the length of the array to scanf() and checking that it successfuly read the value, like this
if (scanf("%100s", x) != 1)
return -1; /* Perhaps EOF, i.e. you pressed Ctrl+D or (Ctrl+Z MS Windows) */
If you don't check your program will invoke undefined behavior, and if here it doesn't hurt any critical part of your simple program, if you don't learn to do it, then you will have a lot of hard do debug bugs in the future when you write a bigger program.
The quotes in your if statement evaluate to multicharacter constants, which in my compiler (VC++ 2013) happen to be 785B6A5D and 785B695D respectively, which are the ASCII codes of these characters glued together. Thus that if never executes. Also, what do you mean by "didn't work"? Did you get a compilation error? If yes, what did it say? Otherwise you may have exceeded the time limit since bubble sort is extremely slow.
I am originally a Java programmer who is now struggling with C and specifically C's pointers.
The idea on my mind is to receive a string, from the user, on a command line, into a character pointer. I then want to access its individual elements. The idea is later to devise a function that will reverse the elements' order. (I want to work with anagrams in texts.)
My code is
#include <stdio.h>
char *string;
int main(void)
{
printf("Enter a string: ");
scanf("%s\n",string);
putchar(*string);
int i;
for (i=0; i<3;i++)
{
string--;
}
putchar(*string);
}
(Sorry, Code marking doesn't work).
What I am trying to do is to have a first shot at accessing individual elements. If the string is "Santillana" and the pointer is set at the very beginning (after scanf()), the content *string ought to be an S. If unbeknownst to me the pointer should happen to be set at the '\0' after scanf(), backing up a few steps (string-- repeated) ought to produce something in the way of a character with *string. Both these putchar()'s, though, produce a Segmentation fault.
I am doing something fundamentally wrong and something fundamental has escaped me. I would be eternally grateful for any advice about my shortcomings, most of all of any tips of books/resources where these particular problems are illuminated. Two thick C books and the reference manual have proved useless as far as this.
You haven't allocated space for the string. You'll need something like:
char string[1024];
You also should not be decrementing the variable string. If it is an array, you can't do that.
You could simply do:
putchar(string[i]);
Or you can use a pointer (to the proposed array):
char *str = string;
for (i = 0; i < 3; i++)
str++;
putchar(*str);
But you could shorten that loop to:
str += 3;
or simply write:
putchar(*(str+3));
Etc.
You should check that scanf() is successful. You should limit the size of the input string to avoid buffer (stack) overflows:
if (scanf("%1023s", string) != 1)
...something went wrong — probably EOF without any data...
Note that %s skips leading white space, and then reads characters up to the next white space (a simple definition of 'word'). Adding the newline to the format string makes little difference. You could consider "%1023[^\n]\n" instead; that looks for up to 1023 non-newlines followed by a newline.
You should start off avoiding global variables. Sometimes, they're necessary, but not in this example.
On a side note, using scanf(3) is bad practice. You may want to look into fgets(3) or similar functions that avoid common pitfalls that are associated with scanf(3).
Thank you everybody so far for your input and advice!
Additionally:
After testing and toying further, it seems individual calls to FileReader succeed. But calling FileReader multiple times (these might be separate versions of FileReader) causes the issue to occur.
End Add
Hello,
I have a very unusual problem [please read this fully: it's important] (Code::Blocks compiler, Windows Vista Home) [no replicable code] with the C File Reading functions (fread, fgetc). Now, normally, the File Reading functions load up the data correctly to a self-allocating and self-deallocating string (and it's not the string's issue), but this is where it gets bizarre (and where Quantum Physics fits in):
An error catching statement reports that EOF occurred too early (IE inside the comments section at the start of the text file it's loading). Printing out the string [after it's loaded] reports that indeed, it's too short (24 chars) (but it has enough space to fit it [~400] and no allocation issues). The fgetc loop iterator reports it's terminating at just 24 (the file is roughly 300 chars long) with an EOF: This is where it goes whacky:
Temporarily checking Read->_base reports the entire (~300) chars are loaded - no EOF at 24. Perplexed, [given it's an fgetc loop] I added a printf to display each char [as a %d so I could spot the -1 EOF] at every step so I could see what it was doing, and modified it so it was a single char. It loops fine, reaching the ~300 mark instead of 24 - but freezes up randomly moments later. BUT, when I removed printf, it terminated at 24 again and got caught by the error-catching statement.
Summary:
So, basically: I have a bug that is affected by the 'Observer Effect' out of quantum physics: When I try to observe the chars I get from fgetc via printf, the problem (early EOF termination at 24) disappears, but when I stop viewing it, the error-catch statement reports early termination.
The more bizarre thing is, this isn't the first time it's occurred. Fread had a similar problem, and I was unable to figure out why, and replaced it with the fgetc loop.
[Code can't really be supplied as the code base is 5 headers in size].
Snippet:
int X = 0;
int C = 0;
int I = 0;
while(Copy.Array[X] != EOF)
{
//Copy.Array[X] = fgetc(Read);
C = fgetc(Read);
Copy.Array[X] = C;
printf("%d %c\n",C,C); //Remove/add this as necessary
if(C == EOF){break;}
X++;
}
Side-Note: Breaking it down into the simplest format does not reproduce the error.
This is the oldest error in the book, kind of.
You can't use a variable of type char to read characters (!), since the EOF constant doesn't fit.
You need:
int C;
Also, the while condition looks scary, you are incrementing X in the loop, then checking the (new) position, is that properly initialized? You don't show how Copy.Array is set up before starting the loop.
I would suggest removing that altogether, it's very strange code.
In fact, I don't understand why you loop reading single characters at all, why not just use fread() to read as much as you need?
Firstly, unwind's answer is a valid point although I'm not sure whether it explains the issues you are seeing.
Secondly,
printf("%d %c\n",C,C); //Remove/add this as necessary
might be a problem. The %d and %c format specifiers expect an int to be the parameter, you are only passing a char. Depending on your compiler, this might mean that they are too small.
This is what I think the problem is:
How are you allocating Copy.Array? Are you making sure all its elements are zeroed before you start? If you malloc it (malloc just leaves whatever garbage was in the memory it returns) and an element just happens to contain 0xFF, your loop will exit prematurely because your while condition tests Copy.Array[X] before you have placed a character in that location.
This is one of the few cases where I allow myself to put an assignment in a condition because the pattern
int c;
while ((c = fgetc(fileStream)) != EOF)
{
doSomethingWithC(c);
}
is really common
Edit
Just read your "Additionally" comment. I think it is highly likely you are overrunning your output buffer. I think you should change your code to something like:
int X = 0; int C = 0; int I = 0;
while(X < arraySize && (C = fgetc(Read)) != EOF)
{
Copy.Array[X] = C;
printf("%d %c\n", (int)C, (int)C);
X++;
}
printf("\n");
Note that I am assuming that you have a variable called arraySize that is set to the number of characters you can write to the array without overrunning it. Note also, I am not writing the EOF to your array.
You probably have some heap corruption going on. Without seeing code it's impossible to say.
Not sure if this is your error but this code:
C = fgetc(Read);
Copy.Array[X] = C;
if(C == EOF){break;}
Means you are adding the EOF value into your array - I'm pretty sure you don't want to do that, especially as your array is presumably char and EOF is int, so you'll actually end up with some other value in there (which could mess up later loops etc).
Instead I suggest you change the order so C is only put in the array once you know it is not EOF:
C = fgetc(Read);
if(C == EOF){break;}
Copy.Array[X] = C;
Whilst this isn't what I'd call a 'complete' answer (as the bug remains), this does solve the 'observer effect' element: I found, for some reason, printf was somehow 'fixing' the code, and using std::cout seemed to (well, I can't say 'fix' the problem) prevent the observer effect happening. That is to say, use std::cout instead of printf (as printf is the origin of the observer effect).
It seems to me that printf does something in memory on a lower level that seems to partially correct what does indeed seem to be a memory allocation error.