I'll do my best to be brief:
So I have an assignment where I am creating a 'Wordlist' class. In which I will store a list of words.
These are the member variables
class WordList
{ //...
unsigned int m_count; // Number of words currently in list
unsigned int m_max; // The total size of the list.
char** m_list; // The list storing the words
};
This is my constructor
WordList::WordList(const int max_words) {
if(max_words < 1){
m_list = nullptr;
m_max = 0;
m_count = 0;
}
else
m_list = new char*[max_words];
m_count = 0;
m_max = max_words;
for (int i = 0; i < max_words; i++) {
m_list[i] = new char[20];
}
}
And this is where I start to find problems.
The following add function is supposed to add a word in the form of a c-style string that is pointed to from the array of character pointers that is pointed to from **char m_list .
int WordList::add(const char word[]) {
if (m_count == 0 && m_list != nullptr ) {
strcpy (m_list[m_count], word);
m_count++;
return 0;
}
if (m_count < m_max) {
m_count++;
strcpy (m_list[m_count], word);
return 0;
}
if (m_count == m_max) {
m_count++;
m_max ++;
strcpy (m_list[m_count], word);
return 1;
}
if (strlen(word)==0) {
return -2;
}
if (m_list == nullptr ){
return -2;
}
else
return -2;
}
So the issue I am having is that I clearly not syntactically correct with my * because I am not getting an array of 5 pointers that point to full words rather I am getting the first letter saved to the final destination char but its not copying over everything like I want.
I'm sure I didn't translate my problem to English as well as I should have but hopefully thats a start. Thank you!
An example of how I will be calling my add function:
WordList *wordlist = new WordList(5);
wordlist->add("harry");
wordlist->add("ron");
wordlist->add("hermione");
And it should add to the bottom of the pointer array a pointer to each word
so
cout << wordlist->m_list[0][2] << endl; // Expect 'r'
cout << wordlist->m_list[1] << endl; // Expect "ron"
instead I get
r
printed out only
I don't see anything wrong with your use of double-pointers.
There are other issues, though:
in your WordList::add you should check for empty word or empty list first, and fail fast. Besides, in your code if the word was empty - you would already added it and returned form that function.
in if (m_count < m_max) block, you pre-increment m_count, leaving one element empty and risking to go out-of-bounds on the last entry.
in if (m_count == m_max) { you are CERTAINLY going out-of-bounds
Suggestion: instead of pre-allocating 20-character arrays, leave them nullptr; when you need to a word - use strdup(word); that would allocated a required space for you.
As for your I am getting the first letter saved - I am guessing you are not checking it right...
The problem is that you add the first word:
if (m_count == 0 && m_list != nullptr ) {
strcpy (m_list[m_count], word);
m_count++;
return 0;
}
Which increments m_count so now m_count is 1.
Then you add the second word:
if (m_count < m_max) {
m_count++;
strcpy (m_list[m_count], word);
return 0;
}
Which increments m_count BEFORE adding the word so the second word is at index 2 and index 1 is skipped altogether.
You need to always increment the count after copying the word because m_count is 1 based and the array is 0 based.
Related
Inside the ArrayList I'm trying to delete all possible 0's that are appended as input, but for now it only deletes just one 0, no matter where it is located. But seems like I can't delete more than one zero at the time. How can I fix this?
void AList::elimZeros(){
int i;
int curr = 0;
for(i=0; i < listSize; i++) {
if ( (listArray[i] != 0 ) && (curr<listSize) ){
listArray[curr] = listArray[i];
curr++;
}
else if (listArray[i] == 0 )
{
listArray[curr] = listArray[i+1];
listSize--;
curr++;
}
}
}
This is the class for the ADT
class AList : public List {
private:
ListItemType* listArray; // Array holding list elements
static const int DEFAULT_SIZE = 10; // Default size
int maxSize; // Maximum size of list
int listSize; // Current # of list items
int curr; // Position of current element
// Duplicates the size of the array pointed to by listArray
// and update the value of maxSize.
void resize();
public:
// Constructors
// Create a new list object with maximum size "size"
AList(int size = DEFAULT_SIZE) : listSize(0), curr(0) {
maxSize = size;
listArray = new ListItemType[size]; // Create listArray
}
~AList(); // destructor to remove array
This is the input I'm testing with:
int main() {
AList L(10);
AList L2(20);
L.append(10);
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10>");
L.append(20);
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10,20>");
L.append(30);
L.append(0);
L.append(40);
L.append(0);
L.append(0);
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10,20,30,0,40>");
L.elimZeros();
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10,20,30,40>");
assertionReport();
}
It'd be helpful if you posted the class code for AList. Think you confused Java's ArrayList type, but assuming you're using vectors you can always just do:
for (int i = 0; i < listSize; i++) {
if(listArray[i] == 0) listArray.erase(i);
}
EDIT: Assuming this is the template of for the AList class, then there is simply a remove() function. In terms of your code, there are two issues.
You reference listSize in the for loop, then decrement it inside of the loop. Each iteration evaluates the value separately so you're reducing the number of total loop iterations and stopping early.
The other thing is if the entry is zero you shouldn't increment curr and set listArray[curr] = listArray[i+1]. This is basically assuming the next entry will not be a zero. So if it is, then you're copying the element and moving to the next. Your if statement can be cleaned up with:
if (listArray[i] == 0) {
listSize--;
} else {
listArray[curr] = listArray[i];
curr++;
}
I'm implementing a trie to implmenta spelling dictionary. The basic element of a trie is a trienode, which consists of a letter part (char), a flag(whether this char is the last char of a word), and an array of 26 pointers.
Private part of the TrieNode class include:
ItemType item;//char
bool isEnd;//flag
typedef TrieNode* TrieNodePtr;
TrieNodePtr myNode;
TrieNodePtr array[26];//array of pointers
This is part of the test call:
Trie t4 = Trie();
t4.insert("for");
t4.insert("fork");
t4.insert("top");
t4.insert("tops");
t4.insert("topsy");
t4.insert("toss");
t4.print();
cout << t4.wordCount() << endl;
Right now I'm trying to traverse the trie to count how many words there are (how many flags are set to true).
size_t TrieNode::wordCount() const{
for (size_t i = 0; i < 26; i++){
if (array[i] == nullptr){
return 0;
}
if (array[i]->isEnd && array[i] != nullptr){
cout << "I'm here" << endl;
return 1 + array[i]->wordCount();
}
else if(!array[i]->isEnd && array[i]!=nullptr){
cout << "I'm there" << endl;
return 0 + array[i]->wordCount();
}
else{
// do nothing
}
}
}
Every time the function returns 0. I know it's because when the first element in the array is null, then the function exits, so the count is always 0. But I don't know how to avoid this, since every time I have start from the first pointer. I also get a warning:not all control paths return a value. I'm not sure where this comes from. How do I make the function continue to the next pointer in the array if the current pointer is null? Is there a more efficient way to count words? Thank you!
Here is a simple and clear way to do it(using depth-first search):
size_t TrieNode::wordCount() const {
size_t result = isEnd ? 1 : 0;
for (size_t i = 0; i < 26; i++){
if (array[i] != null)
result += array[i]->wordCount();
return result;
}
my knowledge is limited but I have been working (hacking) at this specific data structure for awhile
I use a trie to store ontology strings that are then returned as a stack including the 'gap' proximity when get (string) is called. As an add on the trie stores attributes on the key. The further down the string the greater the detail of the attribute. This is working well for my purposes.
As an additional add on, I use a wildcard to apply an attribute to all child nodes. For example, to add 'paws' to all subnodes of 'mammals.dogs.' I push(mammals.dogs.*.paws). Now, all dogs have paws.
The problem is only the first dog get paws. The function works for push attributes without wild
If you want I can clean this up and give a simplified version, but in the past i've found on stackoverflow it is better to just give the code; I use 'z' as the '*' wild
void Trie::push(ParseT & packet)
{
if (root==NULL) AddFirstNode(); // condition 1: no nodes exist, should this be in wrapper
const string codeSoFar=packet.ID;
AddRecord(root, packet, codeSoFar); //condotion 2: nodes exist
}
void Trie::AddFirstNode(){ // run-once, initial condition of first node
nodeT *tempNode=new nodeT;
tempNode->attributes.planType=0;
tempNode->attributes.begin = 0;
tempNode->attributes.end = 0;
tempNode->attributes.alt_end = 0;
root=tempNode;
}
//add record to trie with mutal recursion through InsertNode
//record is entered to trie one char at a time, char is removed
//from record and function repeats until record is Null
void Trie::AddRecord(nodeT *w, ParseT &packet, string codeSoFar)
{
if (codeSoFar.empty()) {
//copy predecessor vector at level n, overwrites higher level vectors
if (!packet.predecessorTemp.empty())
w->attributes.predecessorTemp = packet.predecessorTemp;
return; //condition 0: record's last char
}
else { //keep parsing down record path
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < w->alpha.size(); i++) {
if (codeSoFar[0] == w->alpha[i].token_char || codeSoFar[0] == 'z') {
return AddRecord(w->alpha[i].next, packet, codeSoFar.substr(1)); // condition 2: char exists
}
}
InsertNode(w, packet, codeSoFar); //condition 3: no existing char --> mutal recursion
}
}
//AddRecord() helper function
void Trie::InsertNode(nodeT *w, ParseT &packet, string codeSoFar) // add new char to vector array
{
for (unsigned int i=0; i <=w->alpha.size(); i++) { // loop and insert tokens in sorted vector
if (i==w->alpha.size() || codeSoFar[0] < w->alpha[i].token_char) { //look for end of vector or indexical position
//create new TokenT
tokenT *tempChar=new tokenT;
tempChar->next=NULL;
tempChar->token_char=codeSoFar[0];
//create new nodeT
nodeT *tempLeaf=new nodeT;
tempLeaf->attributes.begin = 0;
tempLeaf->attributes.end = 0;
tempLeaf->attributes.planType = 0;
tempLeaf->attributes.alt_end = 0;
//last node
if (codeSoFar.size() == 1){
tempLeaf->attributes.predecessorTemp = packet.predecessorTemp;
}
//link TokenT with its nodeT
tempChar->next=tempLeaf;
AddRecord(tempLeaf, packet, codeSoFar.substr(1)); //mutual recursion --> add next char in record, if last char AddRecord will terminate
w->alpha.insert(w->alpha.begin()+i, *tempChar);
return;
}
}
}
root is global nodeT *w
struct ParseT {
string ID; //XML key
int begin = 0; //planned or actual start date
int end = 0; //planned or actual end date - if end is empty then assumed started but not compelted and flag with 9999 and
int alt_end = 0; //in case of started without completion 9999 case, then this holds expected end
int planType = 0; //actuals == 1, forecast == 2, planned == 3
map<string, string> aux;
vector<string> resourceTemp;
vector<string> predecessorTemp;
};
In this code
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < w->alpha.size(); i++) {
if (codeSoFar[0] == w->alpha[i].token_char || codeSoFar[0] == 'z') {
return AddRecord(w->alpha[i].next, packet, codeSoFar.substr(1)); // condition 2: char exists
}
}
you are returning as soon as you call AddRecord, even if it is because of a wildcard. It might be easier to have a separate loop when codeSoFar[0] == 'z' that goes through all the alphas and adds the record. Then have an else clause that does your current code.
Edit: Here is what I meant, in code form:
else { //keep parsing down record path
// Handle wildcards
if (codeSoFar[0] == 'z') {
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < w->alpha.size(); i++) {
AddRecord(w->alpha[i].next, packet, codeSoFar.substr(1)); // condition 2: char exists
}
}
else {
// Not a wildcard, look for a match
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < w->alpha.size(); i++) {
if (codeSoFar[0] == w->alpha[i].token_char) {
return AddRecord(w->alpha[i].next, packet, codeSoFar.substr(1)); // condition 2: char exists
}
}
InsertNode(w, packet, codeSoFar); //condition 3: no existing char --> mutal recursion
}
}
So I thought I understood how to implement an array of pointers but my compiler says otherwise =(. Any help would be appreciated, I feel like I'm close but am missing something crucial.
1.) I have a struct called node declared:.
struct node {
int num;
node *next;
}
2.) I've declared a pointer to an array of pointers like so:
node **arrayOfPointers;
3.) I've then dynamically created the array of pointers by doing this:
arrayOfPointers = new node*[arraySize];
My understanding is at this point, arrayOfPointers is now pointing to an array of x node type, with x being = to arraySize.
4.) But when I want to access the fifth element in arrayOfPointers to check if its next pointer is null, I'm getting a segmentation fault error. Using this:
if (arrayOfPointers[5]->next == NULL)
{
cout << "I'm null" << endl;
}
Does anyone know why this is happening? I was able to assign a value to num by doing: arrayOfPointers[5]->num = 77;
But I'm confused as to why checking the pointer in the struct is causing an error. Also, while we're at it, what would be the proper protoype for passing in arrayOfPointers into a function? Is it still (node **arrayOfPointers) or is it some other thing like (node * &arrayOfPointers)?
Thanks in advance for any tips or pointers (haha) you may have!
Full code (Updated):
/*
* Functions related to separate chain hashing
*/
struct chainNode
{
int value;
chainNode *next;
};
chainNode* CreateNewChainNode (int keyValue)
{
chainNode *newNode;
newNode = new (nothrow) chainNode;
newNode->value = keyValue;
newNode->next = NULL;
return newNode;
}
void InitDynamicArrayList (int tableSize, chainNode **chainListArray)
{
// create dynamic array of pointers
chainListArray = new (nothrow) chainNode*[tableSize];
// allocate each pointer in array
for (int i=0; i < tableSize; i++)
{
chainListArray[i]= CreateNewChainNode(0);
}
return;
}
bool SeparateChainInsert (int keyValue, int hashAddress, chainNode **chainListArray)
{
bool isInserted = false;
chainNode *newNode;
newNode = CreateNewChainNode(keyValue); // create new node
// if memory allocation did not fail, insert new node into hash table
if (newNode != NULL)
{
//if array cell at hash address is empty
if (chainListArray[hashAddress]->next == NULL)
{
// insert new node to front of list, keeping next pointer still set to NULL
chainListArray[hashAddress]->next = newNode;
}
else //else cell is pointing to a list of nodes already
{
// new node's next pointer will point to former front of linked list
newNode->next = chainListArray[hashAddress]->next;
// insert new node to front of list
chainListArray[hashAddress]->next = newNode;
}
isInserted = true;
cout << keyValue << " inserted into chainListArray at index " << hashAddress << endl;
}
return isInserted;
}
/*
* Functions to fill array with random numbers for hashing
*/
void FillNumArray (int randomArray[])
{
int i = 0; // counter for for loop
int randomNum = 0; // randomly generated number
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++) // do this for entire array
{
randomNum = GenerateRandomNum(); // get a random number
while(!IsUniqueNum(randomNum, randomArray)) // loops until random number is unique
{
randomNum = GenerateRandomNum();
}
randomArray[i] = randomNum; // insert random number into array
}
return;
}
int GenerateRandomNum ()
{
int num = 0; // randomly generated number
// generate random number between start and end ranges
num = (rand() % END_RANGE) + START_RANGE;
return num;
}
bool IsUniqueNum (int num, int randomArray[])
{
bool isUnique = true; // indicates if number is unique and NOT in array
int index = 0; // array index
//loop until end of array or a zero is found
//(since array elements were initialized to zero)
while ((index < ARRAY_SIZE) && (!randomArray[index] == 0))
{
// if a value in the array matches the num passed in, num is not unique
if (randomArray[index] == num)
{
isUnique = false;
}
index++; // increment index counter
} // end while
return isUnique;
}
/*
*main
*/
int main (int argc, char* argv[])
{
int randomNums[ARRAY_SIZE] = {0}; // initialize array elements to 0
int hashTableSize = 0; // size of hash table to use
chainNode **chainListArray;
bool chainEntry = true; //testing chain hashing
//initialize random seed
srand((unsigned)time(NULL));
FillNumArray(randomNums); // fill randomNums array with random numbers
//test print array
for(int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++)
{
cout << randomNums[i] << endl;
}
//test chain hashing insert
hashTableSize = 19;
int hashAddress = 0;
InitDynamicArrayList(hashTableSize, chainListArray);
//try to hash into hash table
for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++)
{
hashAddress = randomNums[i] % hashTableSize;
chainEntry = SeparateChainInsert(randomNums[i], hashAddress, chainListArray);
}
system("pause");
return 0;
}
arrayOfPointers = new node*[arraySize];
That returns a bunch of unallocated pointers. Your top level array is fine, but its elements are still uninitialized pointers, so when you do this:
->next
You invoke undefined behavior. You're dereferencing an uninitialized pointer.
You allocated the array properly, now you need to allocate each pointer, i.e.,
for(int i = 0; i < arraySize; ++i) {
arrayOfPointers[i] = new node;
}
As an aside, I realize that you're learning, but you should realize that you're essentially writing C here. In C++ you have a myriad of wonderful data structures that will handle memory allocation (and, more importantly, deallocation) for you.
Your code is good, but it's about how you declared your InitDynamicArrayList. One way is to use ***chainListArray, or the more C++-like syntax to use references like this:
void InitDynamicArrayList (int tableSize, chainNode **&chainListArray)
So my code is suppose to insert numbers into a dynamic array, add more capacity to the array if more is needed, remove numbers from the array and then make sure the only NULLS occur at the end of the array. It also tells the user how many numbers are in the array and what is the total size of the array. My problem is when I remove a number from the array, it sometimes prints out there is a number -33686019 in my array. This doesn't occur much, but I don't want it to occur at all.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
int* gArray = NULL;
int gSize = 0;
int gCapacity = 0;
void Insert(int value);
void Remove(int value);
void Resize(int newCapacity);
void Print(void);
void main()
{
int input = 0;
while(input != 3)
{
printf(">=== Dynamic Array ===\n");
printf("What do you want to do?\n");
printf("1. Insert\n");
printf("2. Remove\n");
printf("3. Quit\n");
printf("Your choice: ");
scanf_s("%d", &input);
printf("\n\n");
int value = 0;
switch(input)
{
case 1:
{
printf("Enter a number: ");
scanf_s("%d", &value);
Insert(value);
Print();
break;
}
case 2:
{
printf("Enter number you wish to delete: ");
scanf_s("%d", &value);
Remove(value);
Print();
break;
}
case 3:
{
break;
}
default:
{
printf("Invalid selection\n");
}
}
}
}
void Insert(int value)
{
bool valueSet = false;
while(valueSet == false)
{
if(gArray == NULL)
{
Resize(1);
gArray[gSize] = value;
++gSize;
valueSet = true;
}
else if(gArray[gCapacity] == NULL)
{
gArray[gSize] = value;
++gSize;
valueSet = true;
}
else if(gArray[gCapacity] != NULL)
{
Resize((gCapacity + 1));
gArray[gSize] = value;
++gSize;
valueSet = true;
}
}
}
void Resize(int newCapacity)
{
int* tempArray = new int[newCapacity];
std::copy(gArray, gArray+(newCapacity-1), tempArray);
gArray = new int[newCapacity];
std::copy (tempArray, tempArray+(newCapacity-1), gArray);
gCapacity = newCapacity;
}
void Remove(int value)
{
for(int i = 0; i < gCapacity; ++i)
{
if(gArray[i] == value)
{
gArray[i] = NULL;
--gSize;
}
}
for(int i = 0; i < gCapacity; ++i)
{
if(gArray[i] == NULL)
{
gArray[i] = gArray[(i + 1)];
gArray[(i + 1)] = NULL;
}
}
}
void Print(void)
{
printf("Array contains: ");
for(int i = 0; i < gCapacity; ++i)
{
if(gArray[i] != NULL)
{
printf("%d, ", gArray[i]);
}
}
printf("size = %d, capacity = %d\n", gSize, gCapacity);
}
An option, since you are using the c++ standard library would be to remove all your code, and use std::list and its insert and remove methods. If you require the data to be in a dynamic array, then use std::vector and the erase remove idiom for removal.
I have to point out that, since your question is "Removing int value in dynamic array and setting it to NULL", that setting an int to NULL is essentially setting it to the value 0, since NULL tends to be a define for 0. So if your list were to contain zeroes, this setting to NULL and checking for equality with NULL would completely break the logic of your algorithm. C++11 has nullptr, an actual null type that cannot be assigned to an int, to deal with this kind of problem.
The concrete problem is that you don't initialize the new array (resp. tempArray) in your Resize function.
When calling
int* tempArray = new int[newCapacity];
the array can contain arbitrary values. Only newCapacity-1 values are copied from the old array, so the last value is undefined. It might be 0 but haven't to be. Use
std::fill(tempArray, tempArray+newCapacity, 0);
to initialize your array with zero.
Apart from that, there are a few other problems:
You don't delete the old array before allocating a new one. Use delete[] gArray for that. Also tempArrayisn't deleted!
You don't need to copy the values twice. Just to a gArray = tempArray (after deleting the old gArray, see above)
You assume that newCapacity is just larger by one than gCapacity (you copy newCapacity-1 values from the old array). It would be better to copy gCapacity values instead.
Dynamic arrays which only grow by one are inefficient, since adding a value takes linear time (you have to copy all the old values when inserting a single one). Usually, you double the size of the array every time you run out of space, this gives constant insertion time in average.
NULL is normally used only for pointers. For ints it is equal to zero which means, you cannot store 0 in your array (given your requirements)
In production code, I'd strongly recommend using std::vector instead of any home-grown solution.
EDIT
See #StackUnderflows answer for what is probably the real cause of the error. If you run in Debug mode, some compilers will automatically initialize the array for you, which might be the ccase here.
The gArray[i]=gArray[i+1] line in your Remove function is definitely wrong on the other hand, since it accesses a value which is beyond the limits of the array.
The problem occurs on the last iteration in the second loop of Remove when you do gArray[i] = gArray[i + 1]. On the last iteration, gArray[i + 1] is actually one past the end of your array, so you are now in undefined behavior territory. You are assigning this undefined value to the last element gArray[i].
I suggest using std::vector<int> instead. It manipulates an array under the hood which grows/resizes for you as you add more elements.