Why my program keep asking values continuously if I add this line - c++

I am trying to increase the value of s by the call by reference but when I add *s=*s+5; my code is going to a loop of continuously getting values
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
class node
{
public:
int data;
node *next;
};
node* push(node *head,int newdata,int *s)
{
node *newnode,*temp;
newnode=new node;
newnode->data=newdata;
if(head==0) head=temp=newnode;
else
{
newnode->next=head;
head=newnode;
}
*s=*s+5; //this line
return head;
}
void print(node *head,int s)
{
for(int i=0;i<s;i++)
{
cout<<endl<<head->data;
head=head->next;
}
}
int main()
{
node *head=0;
int s,a;
cin>>s;
for(int i=0;i<s;i++){
cin>>a;
head=push(head,a,&s);
}
print(head,s);
cout<<endl<<endl<<s;
return 0;
}

You are getting an infinite loop because i < s is always true since you increase s by 5 on every push function call. Here's your loop:
for(int i=0; i<s; i++){
After every iteration it checks whether i < s. But you are increasing s by 5 in the function push():
*s=*s+5; //this line
Thus, i is always less than s and the loop keeps on looping. Think of this like, i is trying to catch s but everytime i takes a step, s takes 5 steps and runs away. Thus, i is never able to catch s and hence your loop never finishes.
If you keep on looping some day s will become so huge that it will not be able to increase any more and it will overflow. Thus you will enter the realm of undefined behaviour. Undefined behaviour means that no one knows exactly what will happen. Anything can happen, but most likely your program will crash. But it can do other bad things, so you should quickly fix this by not changing s while the loop is looping :)

Related

Insertion and deletion in a stack using linked list

The program is about insertion and deletion in a stack using ling lists.The push works fine but there is problem in the deletion the pop() function has some
error. Every time i try to delete something it gives infinite error with underflow. ie. the top pointer is always null.
#include<iostream>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<process.h>
using namespace std;
struct node
{
int info;
node *next;
}*top,*save,*newptr,*ptr;
node *create_new_node(int);
void push(node*);
void pop();
void display(node*);
int main()
{
top=NULL;
int inf;
char ch='y';
while(ch=='y'||ch=='Y')
{
newptr=new node;
cout<<"\nEnter the info to be added in the beginning of the stack\n";
cin>>inf;
if(newptr==NULL)
cout<<"\nCannot create new node.ABORTING!!\n";
else
{
newptr=create_new_node(inf);
cout<<"\nPress enter to continue\n";
system("pause");
}
push(newptr);
cout<<"\nthe info has been inserted in the stack\n";
cout<<"\nThe stack now is\n";
display(newptr);
cout<<"\ndo you wish to add more elements to the stack.\nIf yes then
press y or else press n\n";
cin>>ch;
if(ch=='n'||ch=='N')
{
cout<<"\ndo you to delete elements from the stack\n";
cout<,"\nIf yes then press d else press n\n";
cin>>ch;
if(ch=='d'||ch=='D')
{
while(ch=='d'||ch=='D')
{
pop();
cout<<"\npress d to delete more elements y to add more
elements and n to exit\n";
cin>>ch;
}
}
}
}
delete(ptr);
delete(newptr);
delete(top);
delete(save);
return 0;
}
node* create_new_node(int n)
{
ptr=new node;
ptr->info=n;
ptr->next=NULL;
return ptr;
}
void push(node *np)
{
if(top==NULL)
top=np;
else
{
save=top;
top=np;
np->next=save;
}
}
void pop()
{
if(top==NULL)
cout<<"underflow";
else
{
ptr=top;
top=top->next;
delete ptr;
}
}
void display(node *np)
{
while(np!=NULL)
{
cout<<np->info<<"->";
np=np->next;
}
}
There are multiple bugs in the shown code.
Your main bug:
while(ch=='d'||ch=='D')
{
pop();
cout<<"\npress d to delete more elements y to add more elements and n to exit\n";
}
At this point, when ch is 'd' or 'D' execution will enter the while loop, of course. A call to pop() is made, which removes the topmost element from the stack, prints a message, and repeats the while loop.
At this point your program will make an important discovery that ch is still either 'd' or 'D'. Nothing has changed its value. A computer program always does exactly what you tell it to do, unfortunately, instead of what you think you want it to do. No matter how hard you look here, you will never find any code here that ever changes the value of ch. It will remain at its current value forever. And so the while loop runs again. And again. And again. Nothing ever changes the value of ch, at this point, so you have an infinite loop.
Additionally, in your main:
newptr=new node;
This pointer's value is later compared to NULL; and if not ... it gets completely overwritten by
newptr=create_new_node(inf);
This accomplishes absolutely nothing, except leaking memory. This code appears to be leftover junk, and should be cleaned up after fixing the faulty while loop logic.

Segmentation Fault 11 whenever I run this. Would like assistance/feedback

So I'm making a really rudimentary implementation of a circular list. I haven't made the remove function yet. Whenever I run the cpp, I get a seg fault 11. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Thank you.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
struct node{
node* next=NULL;
bool tail= false;
int contents;
};
node* start;//start is a pointer that exists at the start of the list before the first element
class CircList{
node *seek;
public:
CircList (){ //creates a list of one node that points to itself
node *b= new node;
b->contents=0;
b->next = b;
start->next=b;
b->tail=true;
}
bool empty(){
if(start->next==NULL){
return true;
}
return false;
}
int size(CircList a){
if(start->next==NULL){
cout<<"size is 0 \n";
return true;
}
seek=start->next;
for(int i=0; i++;){
if(seek->tail==true){
cout<<"size is "<<i;
}
seek=seek->next;
}
return 0;
}
void insert(int pos, int val){
if(start->next ==NULL){//if inseting when the list is empty
node *b= new node;
b->next = b;
b->tail=true;
return;
}
node *b= new node;
b->contents= val;
seek=start->next;
for(int i=0;i<=pos; i++){
if(seek->tail==true){//if inserting at the end
seek->tail=false;
b->tail=true;
seek->next=b;
b->next=start->next;
}
if(pos==i){//if inserting between two nodes
b->next = seek->next;
seek->next = b;
}
seek=seek->next;
}
}
void remove(int a){
seek=start->next;
for(int i=0;i<=a-1; i++){
if(i<a){
seek=seek->next;
}
if(i==a-1){
}
}
}
void display(){
cout<<start->next->contents; //will also be completed in the near future
seek=start->next;
for(int i=0; ;i++){
if(seek->tail==false){
cout<<seek->contents<<"\n";
}
if(seek->tail==true){
cout<<seek->contents<<"\n";
return;
}
}
}
};
That was the .h file. The following is the cpp. I just plugged in numbers to test. I want to get the program running so that I can test how it behaves.
#include <iostream>
#include "CircList.h"
using namespace std;
int main(){
CircList a;
a.insert (5,5);
a.insert (5,5);
a.insert (1,4);
a.insert (20,65);
a.insert (3,7);
a.size(a);
a.display();
}
I kept treating start as a node instead of a pointer. By making start = Null and replacing all the "start->next"'s with "start", I got it to compile and run. But now it's only infinitely inserting nodes with a value of 0 in the contents.
Edit: I fixed it. By changing that weird for loop in the display function to a while loop, it doesn't do infinite inserts of the node in the constructor, anymore. It seems to work decently enough now.
This here causes a seg fault
start->next=b;
because start is NULL at the start of the program so you are de-referencing a null pointer.
instead set start to the first node in your constructor
start = b;
Your global variable start is an uninitialized pointer, yet you dereference it all over the place.

Segmentation Error C++

I am fairly new to the C++ language and I am trying to write a recursive method to traverse a tree. I have a traverse method but there is one line of code that causes a segmentation fault. I have tested this by commenting and uncommenting the line, compiling and executing. I have researched why segmentation errors are caused and do not see why any of what I am doing is causing a problem with the memory. Can someone give me advice about what I am doing wrong?
map<int, Node> theNodes;
void initialize()
{
// first we read the data
while (inStream.hasNext())
{
string nextLine = inStream.nextLine();
Node newNode = Node(nextLine);
this->theNodes[newNode.getSequence()] = newNode;
}
}
Code for getDownLinks() and getSequence
vector<int> downLinks;
int sequence;
vector<int> Node::getDownLinks() const
{
return this->downLinks; //
}
int Node::getSequence() const
{
return this->sequence;
}
Traversal Class Code
int totalPayoff;
Node headNode;
int Traversal::traverse()
{
Node headNode = theNodes[0];
std::vector<int> downLinks = headNode.getDownLinks();
for(int i = 0; i < downLinks.size(); i++)
{
int a = 0;
Node currentNode = theNodes[downLinks[i]];
traverseInner(a, currentNode);
}
return this->totalPayoff;
}
Here is the traverseInner function
int Traversal::traverseInner(int& level, Node& node)
{
std::vector<int> nodeDownLinks = node.getDownLinks();
if(nodeDownLinks.size() == 0)
{
totalPayoff = totalPayoff + node.getPayoff();
return 0;
}
for(int i = 0; i < nodeDownLinks.size(); i++)
{
int a = 0;
Node currentNode = theNodes[nodeDownLinks[i]]; <-- This causes segmentation error.
traverseInner(a, currentNode);
}
return totalPayoff;
}
Any variables that are not declared here are declared in the header file. The code compiles fine.
I'd also like to mention that I have written this code in many different ways and through my observations have come to the conclusion that any variable that is trying to be accessed in the braces of a nested statement cannot be accessed by the memory. Even the int a variable that is declared right above the problem statement and even hard coded data which is supposed to be there such as nodeDownLinks. If I try to print out through standard output the size of the vector inside one of the nested statements, I also get a segmentation error.
Probably the value inside "nodeDownLinks[i]" it is not initialized, having a memory random value, then you are trying to access this position in the
"theNodes" array and gives to you the segmentation fault.
Please, be sure the values inside "nodeDownLinks" are initialized.
99% it crashes because theNodes has less size, then nodeDownLinks[i] contains index. So nodeDownLinks[i] contains wrong index, u'd better check it and print what goes wrong this way:
int a = 0;
int link = nodeDownLinks[i];
if (theNodes.size() <= link)
std::err << "Wrong link " << link << " in Node" << std::endl;
else
traverseInner(a, theNodes[link]);
It shouldnt crash and you can find wrong index in nodeDownLink easily!

Why does this code crash while testing stack?

OK, so I edited my code, but I still have two problems :
But here's my code first :
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
struct stack
{
int data[5];
int top;
};
void push (int a, stack &S)
{
S.top++;
if (S.top<5)
{
S.data[S.top]=a;
}
else cout<<"Stack is full!!!"<<endl; S.top--;
}
int pop(stack &S)
{
if (S.top==-1)
{
cout<<"Stack is empty!"<<endl;
}
else
{
int temp=S.data[S.top];
S.data[S.top]=NULL;
S.top--;
return temp;
}
}
bool isEMPTY(stack &S)
{
if (S.top==-1)
return true;
else return false;
}
bool isFULL(stack &S)
{
if (S.top==5)
return true;
else return false;
}
int main()
{
stack S = { {}, -1 };
push(5,S); cout<<"5 is pushed \n"<<endl;
push(3,S); cout<<"3 is pushed \n"<<endl;
push(1,S); cout<<"1 is pushed \n"<<endl;
push(2,S); cout<<"2 is pushed \n"<<endl;
push(6,S); cout<<"6 is pushed \n"<<endl;
push(7,S); cout<<"7 is pushed \n"<<endl;
cout<<pop(S)<<"is popped\n"<<endl;
cout<<pop(S)<<"is popped\n"<<endl;
cout<<pop(S)<<"is popped\n"<<endl;
return 0;
}
So, the first problem is, when I pop I get a "Totally random value" and it's not like LIFO.
Second is, I actually intended on inserting 6 values, when I already had the max value = 5, so the output actually showed me the 6 values.
stack S;
Since stack is POD, the above line doesn't initialize the member top. As such, using an uninitialized top in push and pop functions invokes undefined behavior.
Write this:
stack S {}; //must be compiled in C++11 mode, else write : stack S = stack();
This value-initializes S and its members, which means, top is initialized to 0. The rest of the code may still have other problems, but at least you have fixed the issues with proper initialization. If you work with 0 as initial value of top, you've write the logic of push and pop accordingly!
Once you fix that, check the value of top before pushing and poping values from the stack, as the member array can have at most 5 elements, and you cannot pop more elements when it is empty. You must maintain these invariants.
I do not see where an object of type stack was created and how data member top was initialized.
Also take nto account that member function push does not check whether there is an attempt to add an item beyond the array.
You should define the object the following way
stack S = { {}, -1 };
else cout<<"Stack is full!!!"<<endl; S.top--;
is identical to :
else
{
cout<<"Stack is full!!!"<<endl;
}
S.top--;
as a general rule, try to avoid: writing if/else without curly brackets, and, avoid writing more then one line of code in the same line.
The mistake is:
stack s;//you define the local variable "s" without been intitialized.
push(5,s);//pass the uninlitialized "s" to the function "push",when debugging your code,"s.top" is not a expected "-1",but some value incredible~(often extreamly larger than 5),so your push operation failed!
stack S;
S.top = -1;
for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
S.data[i] = 0;
}

Memory leak in trivial stack implementation

I'm decently experienced with Python and Java, but I recently decided to learn C++. I decided to make a quick integer stack implementation, but it has a massive memory leak that I can't understand. When I pop the node, it doesn't seem to be releasing the memory even though I explicitly delete the old node upon poping it. When I run it, it uses 150mb of memory, but doesn't release any of it after I empty the stack. I would appreciate any help since this is my first foray into a language without garbage collection. This was compiled with gcc 4.3 on 64-bit Kubuntu.
//a trivial linked list based stack of integers
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class Node
{
private:
int num;
Node * next;
public:
Node(int data, Node * next);
int getData();
Node * getNext();
};
Node::Node(int data, Node * next_node)
{
num = data;
next = next_node;
}
inline int Node::getData()
{
return num;
}
inline Node* Node::getNext()
{
return next;
}
class Stack
{
private:
unsigned long int n;
Node * top;
public:
Stack(int first);
Stack();
void push(int data);
int pop();
int peek();
unsigned long int getSize();
void print();
void empty();
};
Stack::Stack(int first)
{
Node first_top (first, NULL);
top = &first_top;
n = 1;
}
Stack::Stack()
{
top = NULL;
n = 0;
}
void Stack::push(int data)
{
Node* old_top = top;
Node* new_top = new Node(data,old_top);
top = new_top;
n++;
}
int Stack::pop()
{
Node* old_top = top;
int ret_num = old_top->getData();
top = old_top->getNext();
delete old_top;
n--;
return ret_num;
}
inline int Stack::peek()
{
return top->getData();
}
inline unsigned long int Stack::getSize()
{
return n;
}
void Stack::print()
{
Node* current = top;
cout << "Stack: [";
for(unsigned long int i = 0; i<n-1; i++)
{
cout << current->getData() << ", ";
current = current->getNext();
}
cout << current->getData() << "]" << endl;
}
void Stack::empty()
{
unsigned long int upper = n;
for(unsigned long int i = 0; i<upper; i++)
{
this->pop();
}
}
Stack createStackRange(int start, int end, int step = 1)
{
Stack stack = Stack();
for(int i = start; i <= end; i+=step)
{
stack.push(i);
}
return stack;
}
int main()
{
Stack s = createStackRange(0,5e6);
cout << s.peek() << endl;
sleep(1);
cout << "emptying" <<endl;
s.empty();
cout << "emptied" <<endl;
cout << "The size of the stack is " << s.getSize()<<endl;
cout << "waiting..." << endl;
sleep(10);
return 0;
}
How do you KNOW the memory isn't being released? The runtime library will manage allocations and may not release the memory back to the OS until the program terminates. If that's the case, the memory will be available for other allocations within your program during its execution.
However.... you seem to have other problems. My C++ is really rusty since I've been doing Java for 15 years, but in your Stack::Stack constructor you're allocating a Node instance on the system stack and then storing a reference to it in your "Stack". That Node instance goes out of scope when the constructor ends, leaving a dangling pointer.
Stack::Stack(int first)
{
Node first_top (first, NULL);
top = &first_top;
n = 1;
}
This is wrong , you cant assign address of a local object to class member( top ) , since local objects get destroyed when function returns.
Create a node on heap rather than stack , do something like this :
Stack::Stack(int first)
{
top = new Node(first, NULL);
n = 1;
}
And Make the concept of link list clear and use pen and paper if you can do so.
Your Stack::Push(int) operation seems buggy check it out what you have forget to do.
My suggestion is try to implement generic stack with the help of template ,so it will work for all data type .
When createStackRange() returns it'll return a copy of the Stack using the compiler-generated copy constructor which just makes a bitwise copy (i.e., it'll copy the pointer to the first node and the size.)
More seriously, you're missing the destructor for the Stack class. Ideally you'd have it walk the list and call delete on each Node. The Stack object created on the processor stack will automatically be cleaned up automatically when main() exits, but without a destructor, the nodes will still be allocated when the program ends. You probably want something like this for it:
Stack::~Stack()
{
while ( top )
{
Next *next = top->getNext();
delete top;
top = next;
}
}
The way to think of it is that the C++ compiler will automatically generate copy constructors and destructors for you, but they're normally shallow. If you need deep behavior you've got to do it implement it yourself somewhere.
After poring over the code, I couldn't find the leak so I compiled it and ran it in a debugger myself. I agree with Jim Garrision - I think you're seeing an artifact of the runtime rather than an actual leak, because I'm not seeing it on my side. The issues pointed out by NickLarsen and smith are both actual issues that you want to correct, but if you trace the code through, neither should actually be causing the problem you describe. The code smith singles out is never called in your example, and the code Nick singles out would cause other issues, but not the one you're seeing.
Creat a stub to test your code and user Memory Analysis tool like "Valgrind". This will find out memory leaks and corruptions for you.
check man-pages for more information.
Note that you should only roll your own stack for educational purposes. For any real code, you should use the stack implementation that comes with the C++ standard library...