Possible Duplicate:
is this a variable or function
I mistakenly used something like:
int *arr = new int(100);
and it passes compile, but I knew this is wrong. It should be
int *arr = new int[100];
What does the compiler think it is when I wrote the wrong one?
The first line allocates a single int and initializes it to 100. Think of the int(100) as a constructor call.
Since this is a scalar allocation, trying to access arr[1] or to free the memory using delete[] would lead to undefined behaviour.
Wikipedia new(C++) quote:
int *p_scalar = new int(5); //allocates an integer, set to 5. (same syntax as constructors)
int *p_array = new int[5]; //allocates an array of 5 adjacent integers. (undefined values)
UPDATE
In the current Wikipedia article new and delete (C++) the example is removed.
Additionally here's the less intuitive but fully reliable C++ reference for new and new[].
It allocates one object of type int and initialized it to value 100.
A lot of people doesn't know that you can pass an initializer to new, there's a particular idiom that should be made more widely known so as to avoid using memset:
new int[100]();
This will allocate an array of int and zero-initialize its elements.
Also, you shouldn't be using an array version of new. Ever. There's std::vector for that purpose.
The first one creates a single new integer, initializes it to the value 100 and returns a pointer to it.
In C/C++ there is no difference between a pointer to an array and a pointer to a single value (a pointer to an array is in fact just a pointer to its first element). So this is a valid way to create an array with one element.
Related
I know it's a dumb question but I hope someone can help me here:
int size = 5;
int* newarray = new int[size];
This Array won't work. It will have
newarray[1] = very big minus number;
And not an array of Size 5. What am I doing wrong?
It would not be a dump question if it would not be for vague 'won't work' statement. You should be very specific when you describe the problem.
In your particular case, the array 'works'. But the individual elements of the array are not initialized with this statement. This is by design. If you want them to be initialized to 0, you can use
int* newarray = new int[size]();
If you want it initialized to anything else, you will have to write code to initialize every member to desired value.
In C++, when you dynamically initialize an array using new keyword like:
1. int *array = new int[size]
2. int *array = new int[size]()
(1) allocates a portion of memory for that particular type and size in the memory, followed by default initialization (may or may not be zero). While (2) will initialize everything to 0.
However since memory allocation is contagious, you can still access elements outside provided size but will have some garbage value. It's certainly not recommended to go outside of allocated size, since it may lead to unexpected behavior.
So whenever you see a negative value, you are probably going out of the scope of allocated area.
I understand that we use this when we need to give a pointer to an array of pointers in the dynamic memory but what I don't understand is that how this works in the stack.
Does this make an array of pointers in the stack too that is pointing to the array of pointers in the heap or does it make a single pointer in the stack that is pointing to the array of pointers in the heap? if yes, then what is the difference between
int **p = new int*[100]
and
int *p = new int[100]
Thanks in advance. I have been trying to understand this for a long time now and have read a lot of documentation online but I still don't understand this.
int **p declares a pointer on the stack which points to pointer(s) on the heap. Each of that pointer(s) point to an integer or array of integers on the heap.
This:
int **p = new int*[100];
means that you declared a pointer on the stack and initialized it so that it points to an array of 100 pointers on heap. For now each of that 100 pointers point nowhere. By "nowhere" I mean that they point neither to a valid chunk of memory, nor they are nullptrs. They are not initialized, thus they contain some garbage value which was in the memory before the pointers were allocated. You should assign something sensible to them in a loop before usage. Note that p[0] - p[99] pointers are not guaranteed to point to adjacent regions of memory if you assign return values of new to them. For example, if you allocate memory for each of them as p[i] = new int[200];, p[0][201] will not reference p[1][2], but will lead to an undefined behavior.
And this:
int *p = new int[100];
is a pointer on the stack which points to an array of 100 integers on the heap.
Don't worry, pointers and arrays in C are always a source of confusion. In general, when you declare an array of, say type int, you create a pointer of type int that points to the first element in a contiguous block of memory that will store ints. For example, if I have a simple array of ints using int *p_to_intarr = new int[3], I get this:
+++++++ <--------- p_to_intarr
| int |
+++++++
| int |
+++++++
| int |
+++++++
In general, if I want an array of type T, I create a pointer to type T like T *ptr_to_Tarr = new T[3].
So what if I want an array of array of ints? Lets just replace the T in with the type of an "array of ints" and this will give us an array of "array of ints". Well we just say in our first example that the type of an array of ints in int *, and so an array of array of ints would be: int* *ptr_to_arrayofintarr = new int*[3]. Note we just replaced the T with int star. This is often written more neatly as int **ptr_to_arrayofintarr = new int*[3].
So int **p could be a pointer to a 2d array. It could also be a reference to a 1d array; depends on the specific case :)
The new expression evaluates to a pointer of some type, pointing to memory that has been allocated in the free store (essentially the heap) but not necessarily in the free store. (It can still be in the free store depending on the context; for instance, consider an initialization-list in a constructor for an object being allocated in the free store.)
The object(s) initialized by new is/are of course in the free store.
In the assignment statements you've shown, you can see the type of the pointer returned by new on the left side of the equals sign, and the type of the free store object(s) to the right of the new. Thus the only object that is locally evaluated (i.e. might be on the stack) is, in the first case, a pointer-to-pointer-to-int, and in the second case, a pointer-to-int. The objects in free space are an array of pointers-to-ints in the first case and a simple array of ints in the second.
Note that just because the array in the first assignment consists of pointers doesn't mean that the pointers themselves actually point to anything yet; new does not magically recursively allocate free space for objects to be targeted by any pointers in an array it creates. (This wouldn't make much sense anyway.)
The ** means that you have a pointer to pointers. In more practical terms, it means you have a two-dimensional array.
Since each element of the array is also a pointer, you need to initialize those pointers as well:
for (int i = 0; i < 100; ++i)
p[i] = new int[200];
This initializes a 100x200 array. You can access the bottom-right corner with p[99][199].
When it's time to delete the pointer you have to reverse the process:
for (int i = 0; i < 100; ++i)
delete [] p[i];
delete [] p;
I have been working on sorting algorithms for school and have come across a strange issue. When ever I create an integer array bigger than six elements large I get breaks in "free.c" and heap corruption errors.
The code I have narrowed it down to is as follows.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(){
int * pie = new int(7);
pie[6] = 1;
cout << pie[6];
return 0;
}
Sometimes you need to assign more than just the last value, however I can get this error on Visual Studio 2012 and 2010 on multiple computers, in Linux this code works perfectly fine however.
Is this an issue with Windows, have I been doing dynamic int arrays wrong forever or what?
Note:After running this several times, sometimes the output in VS will say something about adding a heap protection shunt which seems to resolve the test throwing the exception but still doesn't solve the issue in larger applications (and I would feel bad having to need such protection applied to my code).
Thanks!
In this case you are allocating a single integer which has the value 7 but treating it like an array of 7 elements. You need to do an actual array allocation
int* pie = new int[7];
Also wouldn't hurt to free the memory at the end of main :)
delete[] pie;
new int(7) allocates a single int, value 7. It doesn't allocate space for 7 int values.
To solve your issue, you need to use:
int* pie = new int[7];
Otherwise, you only allocate one int.
Executing the code below, will overwrite whatever is beyond the array boundaries.
int * pie = new int(7);
pie[6] = 1;
This can lead to hard-to-track random bugs. For instance if it overwrites a pointer…
More informations in: C++ Dynamic Memory allocations
Operators new and new[]
In order to request dynamic memory we use the operator new. new is followed by a data type specifier and -if a
sequence of more than one element is required- the number of these
within brackets []. It returns a pointer to the beginning of the new
block of memory allocated. Its form is:
pointer = new type pointer = new type [number_of_elements]
The first expression is used to allocate memory to contain one single element of type type. The second one is used to assign a
block (an array) of elements of type type, where number_of_elements
is an integer value representing the amount of these. For example:
int * bobby;
bobby = new int [5];
In this case, the system dynamically assigns space for five elements
of type int and returns a pointer to the first element of the
sequence, which is assigned to bobby. Therefore, now, bobby points to
a valid block of memory with space for five elements of type int.
　
Operators delete and delete[]
Since the necessity of dynamic memory is usually limited to specific
moments within a program, once it is no longer needed it should be
freed so that the memory becomes available again for other requests of
dynamic memory. This is the purpose of the operator delete, whose
format is:
delete pointer;
delete [] pointer;
The first expression should be used to delete memory allocated for a
single element, and the second one for memory allocated for arrays of
elements.
The value passed as argument to delete must be either a pointer to a
memory block previously allocated with new, or a null pointer (in the
case of a null pointer, delete produces no effect).
I'm familiar with Java and trying to teach myself C/C++. I'm stealing some curriculum from a class that is hosting their materials here. I unfortunately can't ask the teacher since I'm not in the class. My concern is with the section under "dynamically declared arrays":
If you
want to be able to alter the size of
your array at run time, then declare
dynamic arrays. These are done with
pointers and the new operator. For the
basics on pointers, read the pointers
section.
Allocate memory using new, and then
you access the array in the same way
you would a static array. For example,
int* arrayPtr = new int[10]; for
(int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
arrayPtr[i] = i; }
The memory picture is identical to the
static array, but you can change the
size if you need to. Don't forget you
must deallocate the memory before
allocating new memory (or you will
have a memory leak).
delete [] arrayPtr; // the []
is needed when deleting array pointers
arrayPtr = new int[50]; . . .
When you're completely done with the
array, you must delete its memory:
delete [] arrayPtr;
Dynamic multi-dimensional arrays are
done in a similar manner to Java. You
will have pointers to pointers. For an
example, see a
My understanding is that an array in C is simply a reference to the memory address of the first element in the array.
So, what is the difference between int *pointerArray = new int[10]; and int array[10]; if any?
I've done some tests that seem to indicate that they do the exact same thing. Is the website wrong or did I read that wrong?
#include <cstdlib>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
// Initialize the pointer array
int *pointerArray = new int[10];
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++){
pointerArray[i] = i;
}
// Initialize the regular array
int array[10];
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++){
array[i]= i;
}
cout << *(pointerArray + 5) << endl;
cout << *(array + 5) << endl;
cout << pointerArray[5] << endl;
cout << array[5] << endl;
cout << pointerArray << endl;
cout << array << endl;
return 0;
}
Output:
5
5
5
5
0x8f94030
0xbfa6a37c
I've tried to "dynamically re-size" my pointer array as described on the site, but my new (bigger) pointer array ends up filled with 0's which is not very useful.
int array[10]; declares the array size statically, that means it is fixed - which is the only major difference. It also might be allocated to be inside the function's stack frame, i.e. on the program's stack. You do not need to worry about using delete [] on that kind of array, in fact, you might crash the program if you delete it.
When you use operator new, you allocate memory dynamically which could be slower and the memory usually comes from the heap rather than the program's stack (though not always). This is better in most cases, as you are more limited in the stack space than the heap space. However, you must watch out for memory leaks and delete[] your stuff when you don't need it anymore.
As to your array being filled with zeros, what your class material does not say is that you have to do this:
int *arr = new int[20]; // old array
//do magic here and decide that we need a bigger array
int *bigger = new int[50]; // allocate a bigger array
for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++) bigger[i] = arr[i]; // copy the elements from the old array into the new array
delete[] arr;
arr = bigger;
That code extends the array arr by 30 more elements. Note that you must copy the old data into the new array, or else it will not be there (in your case, everything becomes 0).
My understanding is that an array in C is simply a reference to the memory address of the first element in the array.
So, what is the difference between int *pointerArray = new int[10]; and int array[10]; if any?
What you mention is the reason for much confusion in any C/C++ beginner.
In C/C++, an array corresponds to a block of memory sufficiently large to hold all of its elements. This is associated to the [] syntax, like in your example:
int array[10];
One feature of C/C++ is that you can refer to an array by using a pointer to its type. For this reason, you are allowed to write:
int* array_pointer = array;
which is the same as:
int* array_pointer = &array[0];
and this allows to access array elements in the usual way: array_pointer[3],
but you cannot treat array as a pointer, like doing pointer arithmetics on it (i.e., array++ miserably fails).
That said, it is also true that you can manage arrays without using the [] syntax at all and just allocate arrays by using malloc and then using them with raw pointers. This makes the "beauty" of C/C++.
Resuming: a distinction must be made between the pointer and the memory that it points to (the actual array):
the [] syntax in declarations (i.e., int array[10];) refers to both aspects at once (it gives you, as to say, a pointer and an array);
when declaring a pointer variable (i.e., int* p;), you just get the pointer;
when evaluating an expression (i.e., int i = p[4];, or array[4];), the [] just means dereferencing a pointer.
Apart from this, the only difference between int *pointerArray = new int[10]; and int array[10]; is that former is allocated dynamically, the latter on the stack.
Dynamically allocated:
int * pointerArray = new int[10];
[BTW, this is a pointer to an array of 10 ints, NOT a pointer array]
Statically allocated (possibly on the stack):
int array[10];
Otherwise they are the same.
The problem with understanding C/C++ arrays when coming from Java is that C/C++ distinguishes between the array variable and the memory used to store the array contents. Both concepts are important and distinct. In Java, you really just have a reference to an object that is an array.
You also need to understand that C/C++ has two ways of allocating memory. Memory can be allocated on the help or the stack. Java doesn't have this distinction.
In C and C++, an array variable is a pointer to the first element of the array. An array variable can exist on the heap or the stack, and so can the memory that contains its contents. And they can be difference. Your examples are int arrays, so you can consider the array variable to be an int*.
There are two differences between int *pointerArray = new int[10]; and int array[10];:
The first difference is that the memory that contains the contents of the first array is allocated on the heap. The second array is more tricky. If array is a local variable in a function then its contents are allocated on the stack, but if it is a member variable of a class then its contents are allocated wherever the containing object is allocated (heap or stack).
The second difference is that, as you've realised, the first array is dynamic: its size can be determined at run-time. The second array is fixed: the compiler must be able to determine its size at compile time.
First, I'd look for some other place to learn C++. The page you cite is
very confusing, and has little to do with the way one actually programs
in C++. In C++, most of the time, you'd use std::vector for an array,
not the complex solutions proposed on the page you cite. In practice,
you never use operator new[] (an array new).
In fact, std::vector is in some ways more like ArrayList than simple
arrays in Java; unlike an array in Java, you can simply grow the vector
by inserting elements into it, preferrably at the end. And it supports
iterators, although C++ iterators are considerably different than Java
iterators. On the other hand, you can access it using the []
operator, like a normal array.
The arrays described on the page you cite are usually called C style
arrays. In C++, their use is mostly limited to objects with static
lifetime, although they do occasionally appear in classes. In any case, they are never allocated dynamically.
The main difference is that some operations that are allowed on pointers are not allowed on arrays.
On the one hand:
int ar[10];
is using memory allocated on the stack. You can think of it also locally available and while it is possible to pass a pointer / reference to otehr functions, the memory will be freed as soon as it goes out of scope (in your example at the end of the main method but that's usually not the case).
On the other hand:
int ar* = new int[10];
allocates the memory for the array on the heap. It is available until your whole program exits or it is deleted using
delete[] ar;
note, that for delete you need the "[]" if and only if the corresponding new has had them, too.
There is a difference but not in the area that you point to. *pointerArray will point to the beginning of a block of memory of size 10 bytes. So will array. The only difference will be where it is stored in memory. pointerArray is dynamically assigned memory (at run-time) and hence will go on the heap, while array[10] will be allocated at compile-time and will go to the stack.
It is true that you can get most of array functionality by using a pointer to its first element. But compiler knows that a static array is composed of several elements and the most notable difference is the result of the sizeof operator.
sizeof(pointerArray) = sizeof int*
sizeof(array) = 10 * sizeof int
In many tutorials, the first code samples about dynamic memory start along the lines of:
int * pointer;
pointer = new int; // version 1
//OR
pointer = new int [20]; // version 2
They always proceed to explain how the second version works, but totally avoid talking about the first version.
What I want to know is, what does pointer = new int create? What can I do with it? What does it mean? Every tutorial without fail will avoid talking about the first version entirely. All I've found out (through messing about) is this:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int * pointer;
pointer = new int;
pointer[2] = 1932; // pointer [2] exists? and i can assign to it?!
cout << pointer[2] << endl; // ... and access it successfully?!
};
The fact that I can subscript pointer tells me so far that pointer = new int implicitly creates an array. But if so, then what size is it?
If someone could help clear this all up for me, I'd be grateful...
My teacher explained it like this.
Think of cinema. The actual seats are memory allocations and the ticket you get are the pointers.
int * pointer = new int;
This would be a cinema with one seat, and pointer would be the ticket to that seat
pointer = new int [20]
This would be a cinema with 20 seats and pointer would be the ticket to the first seat. pointer[1] would be the ticket to the second seat and pointer[19] would be the ticket to the last seat.
When you do int* pointer = new int; and then access pointer[2] you're letting someone sit in the aisle, meaning undefined behaviour
This is a typical error in C and C++ for beginners. The first sentence, creates a space for holding just an int. The second one creates a space for holding 20 of those ints. In both cases, however, it assigns the address of the beginning of the dynamically-reserved area to the pointer variable.
To add to the confusion, you can access pointers with indices (as you put pointer[2]) even when the memory they're pointing is not valid. In the case of:
int* pointer = new int;
you can access pointer[2], but you'd have an undefined behavior. Note that you have to check that these accesses don't actually occur, and the compiler can do usually little in preventing this type of errors.
This creates only one integer.
pointer = new int; // version 1
This creates 20 integers.
pointer = new int [20] // version 2
The below is invalid, since pointer[2] translates as *(pointer + 2) ; which is not been created/allocated.
int main()
{
int * pointer;
pointer = new int;
pointer[2] = 1932; // pointer [2] exists? and i can assign to it?!
cout << pointer[2] << endl; // ... and access it succesfuly?!
};
Cheers!
new int[20] allocates memory for an integer array of size 20, and returns a pointer to it.
new int simply allocates memory for one integer, and returns a pointer to it. Implicitly, that is the same as new int[1].
You can dereference (i.e. use *p) on both pointers, but you should only use p[i] on the pointer returned by the new int[20].
p[0] will still work on both, but you might mess up and put a wrong index by accident.
Update: Another difference is that you must use delete[] for the array, and delete for the integer.
pointer = new int allocates enough memory on the heap to store one int.
pointer = new int [20] allocates memory to store 20 ints.
Both calls return a pointer to the newly allocated memory.
Note: Do not rely on the allocated memory being initialized, it may contain random values.
pointer = new int; allocates an integer and stores it's address in pointer. pointer[2] is a synonym for pointer + 2. To understand it, read about pointer arithmetic. This line is actually undefined behavior, because you are accessing memory that you did not previously allocate, and it works because you got lucky.
int* p = new int allocates memory for one integer. It does not implictly create an array. The way you are accessing the pointer using p[2] will cause the undefined behavior as you are writing to an invalid memory location. You can create an array only if you use new[] syntax. In such a case you need to release the memory using delete[]. If you have allocated memory using new then it means you are creating a single object and you need to release the memory using delete.
*"The fact that i can subscript pointer tells me so far that I pointer = new int implicitly creates an array. but if so, then what size is it?"
*
This was the part of the question which I liked the most and which you emphasize upon.
As we all know dynamic memory allocation makes use of the space on the Stack which is specific to the given program.
When we take a closer look onto the definition of new operator :-
void* operator new[] (std::size_t size) throw (std::bad_alloc);
This actually represents an array of objects of that particular size and if this is successful, then it automatically Constructs each of the Objects in the array. Thus we are free to use the objects within the bound of the size because it has already been initialized/constructed.
int * pointer = new int;
On the other hand for the above example there's every possibility of an undefined behaviour when any of
*(pointer + k) or *(k + pointer)
are used. Though the particular memory location can be accessed with the use of pointers, there's no guarantee because the particular Object for the same was not created nor constructed.This can be thought of as a space which was not allocated on the Stack for the particular program.
Hope this helps.
It does not create array. It creates a single integer and returns the pointer to that integer. When you write pointer[2] you refer to a memory which you have not allocated. You need to be carefull and not to do this. That memory can be edited from the external program which you, I belive, don't want.
int * pointer; pointer = new int; // version 1
//OR
pointer = new int [20] // version 2
what I want to know is, what does pointer = new int create? what can I do with it? what does it mean? Every tutorial without fail will avoid talking about the first version entirely
The reason the tutorial doesn't rell you what to do with it is that it really is totally useless! It allocates a single int and gives you a pointer to that.
The problem is that if you want an int, why don't you just declare one?
int i;