How to calculate the length of a mpz_class in bytes? - c++

I want to implement RSA with padding but first I have to find out the length in bytes of the message which is a mpz_class item. Which function would be useful in cpp to accomplish this?
const mpz_class m(argv[1])
What is the length of m in bytes?
Thank you!

#Shawn's comment is correct: The bytes occupied in memory by your class are not what you should be concerned about. Not only does the location of the bytes in memory depend on how your compiler decides to pack them, but their order can also depend on the hardware used.
So, instead of doing some awkward and very fragile memcopy'ish thing that are almost guaranteed to break at some point, you should construct the message yourself (google keyword: Serialization). This also has the advantage that your class can contain stuff that you don't want to add to the message (caches with temp results, or other implementation/optimization stuff).
To the best of my knowledge C++ (unlike f.ex. C#) does not come with build in serialization support, but there are likely to exist libraries that can do a lot of it for you. Otherwise you just have to write your "data member to byte array" functions yourself.
Super simple example:
#include <vector>
#include<iostream>
class myClass
{
int32_t a;
public:
myClass(int32_t val) : a(val) {}
// Deserializer
bool initFromBytes(std::vector<uint8_t> msg)
{
if (msg.size() < 4)
return false;
a = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 4; ++i)
{
a += msg[i] << (i * 8);
}
return true;
}
// Serializer
std::vector<uint8_t> toBytes()
{
std::vector<uint8_t> res;
for (int i = 0; i < 4; ++i)
{
res.push_back(a >> (i*8));
}
return res;
}
void print() { std::cout << "myClass: " << a << std::endl; }
};
int main()
{
myClass myC(123456789);
myC.print();
std::vector<uint8_t> message = myC.toBytes();
myClass recreate(0);
if (recreate.initFromBytes(message))
recreate.print();
else
std::cout << "Error" << std::endl;
return 0;
}

Related

C++ Segmentation fault while dereferencing a void pointer to a vector

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <mutex>
struct STRU_Msg
{
std::string name;
void *vpData;
};
class CMSG
{
public:
template <typename T>
int miRegister(std::string name)
{
STRU_Msg msg;
msg.name = name;
msg.vpData = malloc(sizeof(T));
msgtable.push_back(msg);
std::cout << "registeratio ok\n";
return 0;
}
template <typename T>
int miPublish(std::string name, T tData)
{
for (int i = 0; i < msgtable.size(); i++)
{
if (!name.compare(msgtable[i].name))
{
(*(T *)msgtable[i].vpData) = tData;
std::cout << "SUccess!\n";
return 0;
}
else
{
std::cout << "cannot find\n";
return 0;
}
}
}
private:
std::vector<STRU_Msg> msgtable;
};
int main()
{
CMSG message;
std::string fancyname = "xxx";
std::vector<float> v;
// message.miRegister< std::vector<float> >(fancyname);
// for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
// {
// v.push_back(i);
// }
// std::cout << "v[0]: " << v[0] << ", v[-1]: " << v[v.size()-1] << '\n';
// message.miPublish< std::vector<float> >(fancyname, v);
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
{
v.push_back(i);
}
std::cout << "v[0]: " << v[0] << ", v[-1]: " << v[v.size()-1] << '\n';
message.miRegister< std::vector<float> >(fancyname);
message.miPublish< std::vector<float> >(fancyname, v);
return 0;
}
What I want to achieve is to write a simple publish/subscribe (like ROS) system, I use void pointer so that it works for all data type. This is the simplified code.
If I publish an int, it works fine, but what really confuse me are:
If I pass a long vector (like this code), it gave me the
"segmentation fault (core dump)" error.
If I define the vector between "register" and "publish" (i.e. like
the commented part), this error goes away.
If I use a shorter vector, like size of 10, no matter where I define
it, my code run smoothly.
I use g++ in Linux.
Please help me fix my code and explain why above behaviors will happen, thanks in ahead!
You cannot copy std::vector or any other non-trivial type like that. Before you do anything (even assignment-to) with such an object, you need to construct it using a constructor and placement new.
A way to do this would be
new(msgtable[i].vpData) T;
Do this in the register function.
Then you can assign a value as you do.
Still better, do not use malloc at all, allocate your object with (normal, non-placement) new.
I however strongly suggest ditching void* and moving to a template based implementation of STRU_Msg. If you don't feel like reinventing the wheel, just use std::any.

Pass a vector of custom structs by reference to a boost::compute closure or function

I'm somewhat new to opencl and am trying to learn to use boost::compute properly. Consider the following code:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <boost/compute.hpp>
const cl_int cell_U_size{ 4 };
#pragma pack (push,1)
struct Cell
{
cl_double U[cell_U_size];
};
#pragma pack (pop)
BOOST_COMPUTE_ADAPT_STRUCT(Cell, Cell, (U));
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
using namespace boost;
auto device = compute::system::default_device();
auto context = compute::context(device);
auto queue = compute::command_queue(context, device);
std::vector<Cell> host_Cells;
host_Cells.reserve(10);
for (auto j = 0; j < host_Cells.capacity(); ++j) {
host_Cells.emplace_back(Cell());
for (auto i = 0; i < cell_U_size; ++i) {
host_Cells.back().U[i] = static_cast<cl_double>(i+j);
}
}
std::cout << "Before:\n";
for (auto const& hc : host_Cells) {
for (auto const& u : hc.U)
std::cout << " " << u;
std::cout << "\n";
}
compute::vector<Cell> device_Cells(host_Cells.size(), context);
auto f = compute::copy_async(host_Cells.begin(), host_Cells.end(), device_Cells.begin(), queue);
try {
BOOST_COMPUTE_CLOSURE(Cell, Step1, (Cell cell), (cell_U_size), {
for (int i = 0; i < cell_U_size; ++i) {
cell.U[i] += 1.0;
}
return cell;
});
f.wait(); // Wait for data to finish being copied
compute::transform(device_Cells.begin(), device_Cells.end(), device_Cells.begin(), Step1, queue);
//BOOST_COMPUTE_CLOSURE(void, Step2, (Cell &cell), (cell_U_size), {
// for (int i = 0; i < cell_U_size; ++i) {
// cell.U[i] += 1.0;
// }
//});
//compute::for_each(device_Cells.begin(), device_Cells.end(), Step2, queue);
compute::copy(device_Cells.begin(), device_Cells.end(), host_Cells.begin(), queue);
}
catch (std::exception &e) {
std::cout << e.what() << std::endl;
throw;
}
std::cout << "After:\n";
for (auto const& hc : host_Cells) {
for (auto const& u : hc.U)
std::cout << " " << u;
std::cout << "\n";
}
}
I have a vector of custom structs (actually much more complicated than shown here) that I want to process on the GPU. In the uncommented BOOST_COMPUTE_CLOSURE the compute::transform passes the structs by value, processes them and then copies them back.
I would like to pass these by reference as shown in the commented out BOOST_COMPUTE_CLOSURE with compute::for_each, but the kernel fails to compile (Build Program Failure) when the program is run and I have not found any documentation mentioning how this should be achieved.
I know I can achieve passing by reference (pointers actually, since it's C99) by using BOOST_COMPUTE_STRINGIZE_SOURCE and passing a pointer to the entire vector of structs, but I'd like to use the compute::... functions as these seem more elegant.
If you define BOOST_COMPUTE_DEBUG_KERNEL_COMPILATION macro and building OpenCL program fails, the program source and the build log will be written to stdout.
You can't pass by reference in OpenCL C, which you are trying to do in the BOOST_COMPUTE_CLOSURE. I understand that you would like to pass a __global pointer to your closure and modify values of the variable in global memory, not of the local copy of that value. I don't think it's supported in Boost.Compute, because in for_each (and other algorithms) Boost.Compute always passes value to your function/closure.
Of course you can always implement a workaround - add unary & operator, or implement custom device iterator. However, in presented example it would just decrease performance, because it would lead to non-coalesced memory reads and writes. If you have very array of complex structures (AoS), try to change it structure of arrays (SoA) or/and break your structure.

C++ Free pointers stored in a vector

So, I have these functions (Game inherits from GameInterface; they both currently have no purpose, I'm just testing whether what I have in mind can be done or not.):
vector<GameInterface*> Game::generateChildren() {
vector<GameInterface*> vgf;
// make 10 copies of this object, increasing the 'npawns' attribute
Game* gi = this;
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
gi = new Game(*gi);
vgf.push_back(gi);
++gi->npawns;
}
return vgf;
}
and
const int Library::getBestMovement(GameInterface* gf) const {
vector<GameInterface*> vgf = gf->generateChildren();
int nchildren = vgf.size();
// outputs "child #i has (i+1) pawns" for i in 0..9
for (int i = 0; i < nchildren; ++i) {
cout << "child #" << i << " has " << vgf[i]->num_of_pawns() << " pawns" << endl;
}
// missing some dynamic memory management (deleting the pointers in vgf)
return 0;
}
Since the "children" objects are created with new, and they will no longer be used once getBestMovement ends, I assume I have to free the pointers inside vgf.
The problem is that I've tried everything from
for (auto it = vgf.begin(); it != vgf.end(); ++it)
delete *it;
to using smart pointers, but I always get the same debug assertion error when I execute the program: _BLOCK_TYPE_IS_VALID(pHead->nBlockUse).
Any idea about what the problem is? Thanks
EDIT:
Ok, I had class Game : virtual public GameInterface. Removed the virtual keyword and it works fine now. I don't know why, though (I didn't even know what he virtual keyword did; I'm mostly testing stuff since I'm kind of new to the language, so please bear with me)
EDIT 2:
Forcing the GameInterface destructor to be virtual seems to be the proper solution.
The following code should be vaguely correct:
#include <memory>
#include <vector>
struct GameInterface
{
virtual ~GameInterface() {}
virtual std::vector<std::unique_ptr<GameInterface>> generateChildren() = 0;
};
struct Game : GameInterface
{
std::vector<std::unique_ptr<GameInterface>> generateChildren() override
{
std::vector<std::unique_ptr<GameInterface>> result;
for (int i = 0; i != 10; ++i)
{
result.emplace_back(new Game(result.empty()
? *this
: *result.back()));
++result.back()->npawns;
}
return result;
}
};
int getBestMovement(GameInterface* gf)
{
auto v = gf->generateChildren();
// ...
return 0;
}

openmpi/c++: defining a mpi data type for class with members of variable length (pointers pointing to malloced memory)?

i am currently learning to use openmpi, my aim is to parallelize a simple program whose code i will post bellow.
The program is for testing my concept of paralleling a much bigger program, i hope to learn all i need to know for my actual problem if i succeed with this.
Basically it is a definition of a simple c++ class for lists. A list consists of two arrays, one integer and one double. Entries with the same indicies belong together, in a way that the integer entry is some kind of list entry identifier (maybe an object ID) and the double entry is some kind of quantifier (maybe the weight if an object).
The basic purpose of the program is to add lists together (this is the task i want to parallelize). Adding works as follows: For each entry in one list it is checked if there is the same integer entry in the the other list, if so then the double entry gets added to the double entry in the other list, if there is no such entry in the other list then both the integer and the double entries gets added to the end of the list.
Basically each summand in this list addition represents a storage and each entry is a type of object with a given amount (int is the type and double is the amount), so adding two lists means putting the stuff from the second storage to the first.
The order of the list entries is irrelevant, this means that the addition of lists is not only associative but commutative too!
My plan is to add a very large number of such lists (a few billions) so parallelizing could be to let each thread add a subset of lists first and when this is finished distribute all such sublists (one for each thread) to all of the threads.
My current understanding of openmpi is that only the last step (distributing of finished sublists) needs any special non standard stuff. Basically i need a AllReduce but with a custom data type and a custom operaton.
The first problem i have is understanding how to create a fitting MPI data type. I came to the conclusion that i probably need MPI_Type_create_struct to create a struct type.
I found this site with a nice example: http://mpi.deino.net/mpi_functions/MPI_Type_create_struct.html
from which i learned a lot but the problem is, that in this case there are fixed member arrays. In my case i have lists with arbitrary sized member variables or better with pointers pointing to memory blocks of arbitrary size. So doing it like in the example would lead to creating a new MPI datatype for each list size (using fixed sized lists could help but only in this minimalistic case, but i want to learn how to do it with arbitrary sized lists are preparation for my actual problem).
So my question is: how to create a data type for this special case? What is the best way?
I even thought to maybe write some non mpi code to serialize my class/object, (which would be a lot of work for my real problem but in this example it should be easy) to a single block of bits. Then i could simply use a MPI function to distribute those blocks to all threads and then i just have to translate it back to the actual object, and then i could let each thread simply add the "number-of-threads" lists together to have the same full reduced list on all threads (because the operation is commutative it is not important if the order is the same on each thread in the end).
The problem is that i do not know which MPI function to use to distribute a such memory blocks to each thread so that in the end each thread has an array of "number-of-threads" such blocks (similar like AllReduce but with blocks).
But thats just another idea, i would like to hear from you whats the best way.
Thank you, here is my fully working example program (ignore the MPI parts thats just preparation, you can simply compile with: g++)
As you can see, i needed to create custom copy constructors because standard of the pointer members. I hope thats not a problem for MPI?
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdlib>
#if (CFG_MPI > 0)
#include <mpi.h>
#else
#define MPI_Barrier(xxx) // dummy code if not parallel
#endif
class list {
private:
int *ilist;
double *dlist;
int n;
public:
list(int n, int *il, double *dl) {
int i;
if (n>0) {
this->ilist = (int*)malloc(n*sizeof(int));
this->dlist = (double*)malloc(n*sizeof(double));
if (!ilist || !dlist) std::cout << "ERROR: malloc in constructor failed!" << std::endl;
} else {
this->ilist = NULL;
this->dlist = NULL;
}
for (i=0; i<n; i++) {
this->ilist[i] = il[i];
this->dlist[i] = dl[i];
}
this->n = n;
}
~list() {
free(ilist);
free(dlist);
ilist = NULL;
dlist = NULL;
this->n=0;
}
list(const list& cp) {
int i;
this->n = cp.n;
this->ilist = NULL;
this->dlist = NULL;
if (this->n > 0) {
this->ilist = (int*)malloc(this->n*sizeof(int));
this->dlist = (double*)malloc(this->n*sizeof(double));
if (!ilist || !dlist) std::cout << "ERROR: malloc in copy constructor failed!" << std::endl;
}
for (i=0; i<this->n; i++) {
this->ilist[i] = cp.ilist[i];
this->dlist[i] = cp.dlist[i];
}
}
list& operator=(const list& cp) {
if(this == &cp) return *this;
this->~list();
int i;
this->n = cp.n;
if (this->n > 0) {
this->ilist = (int*)malloc(this->n*sizeof(int));
this->dlist = (double*)malloc(this->n*sizeof(double));
if (!ilist || !dlist) std::cout << "ERROR: malloc in copy constructor failed!" << std::endl;
} else {
this->ilist = NULL;
this->dlist = NULL;
}
for (i=0; i<this->n; i++) {
this->ilist[i] = cp.ilist[i];
this->dlist[i] = cp.dlist[i];
}
return *this;
}
void print() {
int i;
for (i=0; i<this->n; i++)
std::cout << i << " : " << "[" << this->ilist[i] << " - " << (double)dlist[i] << "]" << std::endl;
}
list& operator+=(const list& cp) {
int i,j;
if(this == &cp) {
for (i=0; i<this->n; i++)
this->dlist[i] *= 2;
return *this;
}
double *dl;
int *il;
il = (int *) realloc(this->ilist, (this->n+cp.n)*sizeof(int));
dl = (double *) realloc(this->dlist, (this->n+cp.n)*sizeof(double));
if (!il || !dl)
std::cout << "ERROR: 1st realloc in operator += failed!" << std::endl;
else {
this->ilist = il;
this->dlist = dl;
il = NULL;
dl = NULL;
}
for (i=0; i<cp.n; i++) {
for (j=0; j<this->n; j++) {
if (this->ilist[j] == cp.ilist[i]) {
this->dlist[j] += cp.dlist[i];
break;
}
} if (j == this->n) {// no matching entry found in this
this->ilist[this->n] = cp.ilist[i];
this->dlist[this->n] = cp.dlist[i];
this->n++;
}
}
il = (int *) realloc(this->ilist, (this->n)*sizeof(int));
dl = (double *) realloc(this->dlist, (this->n)*sizeof(double));
if (!il || !dl)
std::cout << "ERROR: 2nd realloc in operator += failed!" << std::endl;
else {
this->ilist = il;
this->dlist = dl;
}
return *this;
}
};
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
int npe, myid;
#if (CFG_MPI > 0)
MPI_Init(&argc, &argv);
MPI_Comm_size(MPI_COMM_WORLD,&npe);
MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD,&myid);
#else
npe=1;
myid=0;
#endif
if (!myid) // reduce output
std::cout << "NPE = " << npe << " MYID = " << myid << std::endl;
int ilist[5] = {14,17,4,29,0};
double dlist[5] = {0.0, 170.0, 0.0, 0.0, 24.523};
int ilist2[6] = {14,117,14,129,0, 34};
double dlist2[6] = {0.5, 170.5, 0.5, 0.5, 24.0, 1.2};
list tlist(5, ilist, dlist);
list tlist2(6, ilist2, dlist2);
if (!myid) {
tlist.print();
tlist2.print();
}
tlist +=tlist2;
if (myid) tlist.print();
#if (CFG_MPI > 0)
MPI_Finalize();
#endif
return 0;
}

Segmentation Fault when trying to push a string to the back of a list

I am trying to write a logger class for my C++ calculator, but I'm experiencing a problem while trying to push a string into a list.
I have tried researching this issue and have found some information on this, but nothing that seems to help with my problem. I am using a rather basic C++ compiler, with little debugging utilities and I've not used C++ in quite some time (even then it was only a small amount).
My code:
#ifndef _LOGGER_H_
#define _LOGGER_H_
#include <iostream>
#include <list>
#include <string>
using std::cout;
using std::cin;
using std::endl;
using std::list;
using std::string;
class Logger
{
private:
list<string> mEntries;
public:
Logger() {}
~Logger() {}
// Public Methods
void WriteEntry(const string& entry)
{
mEntries.push_back(entry);
}
void DisplayEntries()
{
cout << endl << "**********************" << endl
<< "* Logger Entries *" << endl
<< "**********************" << endl
<< endl;
for(list<string>::iterator it = mEntries.begin();
it != mEntries.end(); it++)
{
// *** BELOW LINE IS MARKED WITH THE ERROR ***
cout << *it << endl;
}
}
};
#endif
I am calling the WriteEntry method by simply passing in a string, like so:
mLogger->WriteEntry("Testing");
Any advice on this would be greatly appreciated.
* CODE ABOVE HAS BEEN ALTERED TO HOW IT IS NOW *
Now, the line:
cout << *it << endl;
causes the same error. I'm assuming this has something to do with how I am trying to get the string value from the iterator.
The code I am using to call it is in my main.cpp file:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <sstream>
#include "CommandParser.h"
#include "CommandManager.h"
#include "Exceptions.h"
#include "Logger.h"
using std::string;
using std::stringstream;
using std::cout;
using std::cin;
using std::endl;
#define MSG_QUIT 2384321
#define SHOW_LOGGER true
void RegisterCommands(void);
void UnregisterCommands(void);
int ApplicationLoop(void);
void CheckForLoggingOutput(void);
void ShowDebugLog(void);
// Operations
double Operation_Add(double* params);
double Operation_Subtract(double* params);
double Operation_Multiply(double* params);
double Operation_Divide(double* params);
// Variable
CommandManager *mCommandManager;
CommandParser *mCommandParser;
Logger *mLogger;
int main(int argc, const char **argv)
{
mLogger->WriteEntry("Registering commands...\0");
// Make sure we register all commands first
RegisterCommands();
mLogger->WriteEntry("Command registration complete.\0");
// Check the input to see if we're using the program standalone,
// or not
if(argc == 0)
{
mLogger->WriteEntry("Starting application message pump...\0");
// Full version
int result;
do
{
result = ApplicationLoop();
} while(result != MSG_QUIT);
}
else
{
mLogger->WriteEntry("Starting standalone application...\0");
// Standalone - single use
// Join the args into a string
stringstream joinedStrings(argv[0]);
for(int i = 1; i < argc; i++)
{
joinedStrings << argv[i];
}
mLogger->WriteEntry("Parsing argument '" + joinedStrings.str() + "'...\0");
// Parse the string
mCommandParser->Parse(joinedStrings.str());
// Get the command names from the parser
list<string> commandNames = mCommandParser->GetCommandNames();
// Check that all of the commands have been registered
for(list<string>::iterator it = commandNames.begin();
it != commandNames.end(); it++)
{
mLogger->WriteEntry("Checking command '" + *it + "' is registered...\0");
if(!mCommandManager->IsCommandRegistered(*it))
{
// TODO: Throw exception
mLogger->WriteEntry("Command '" + *it + "' has not been registered.\0");
}
}
// Get each command from the parser and use it's values
// to invoke the relevant command from the manager
double results[commandNames.size()];
int currentResultIndex = 0;
for(list<string>::iterator name_iterator = commandNames.begin();
name_iterator != commandNames.end(); name_iterator++)
{
string paramString = mCommandParser->GetCommandValue(*name_iterator);
list<string> paramStringArray = StringHelper::Split(paramString, ' ');
double params[paramStringArray.size()];
int index = 0;
for(list<string>::iterator param_iterator = paramStringArray.begin();
param_iterator != paramStringArray.end(); param_iterator++)
{
// Parse the current string to a double value
params[index++] = atof(param_iterator->c_str());
}
mLogger->WriteEntry("Invoking command '" + *name_iterator + "'...\0");
results[currentResultIndex++] =
mCommandManager->InvokeCommand(*name_iterator, params);
}
// Output all results
for(int i = 0; i < commandNames.size(); i++)
{
cout << "Result[" << i << "]: " << results[i] << endl;
}
}
mLogger->WriteEntry("Unregistering commands...\0");
// Make sure we clear up our resources
UnregisterCommands();
mLogger->WriteEntry("Command unregistration complete.\0");
if(SHOW_LOGGER)
{
CheckForLoggingOutput();
}
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
void RegisterCommands()
{
mCommandManager = new CommandManager();
mCommandParser = new CommandParser();
mLogger = new Logger();
// Known commands
mCommandManager->RegisterCommand("add", &Operation_Add);
mCommandManager->RegisterCommand("sub", &Operation_Subtract);
mCommandManager->RegisterCommand("mul", &Operation_Multiply);
mCommandManager->RegisterCommand("div", &Operation_Divide);
}
void UnregisterCommands()
{
// Unregister each command
mCommandManager->UnregisterCommand("add");
mCommandManager->UnregisterCommand("sub");
mCommandManager->UnregisterCommand("mul");
mCommandManager->UnregisterCommand("div");
// Delete the logger pointer
delete mLogger;
// Delete the command manager pointer
delete mCommandManager;
// Delete the command parser pointer
delete mCommandParser;
}
int ApplicationLoop()
{
return MSG_QUIT;
}
void CheckForLoggingOutput()
{
char answer = 'n';
cout << endl << "Do you wish to view the debug log? [y/n]: ";
cin >> answer;
switch(answer)
{
case 'y':
ShowDebugLog();
break;
}
}
void ShowDebugLog()
{
mLogger->DisplayEntries();
}
// Operation Definitions
double Operation_Add(double* values)
{
double accumulator = 0.0;
// Iterate over all values and accumulate them
for(int i = 0; i < (sizeof values) - 1; i++)
{
accumulator += values[i];
}
// Return the result of the calculation
return accumulator;
}
double Operation_Subtract(double* values)
{
double accumulator = 0.0;
// Iterate over all values and negativel accumulate them
for(int i = 0; i < (sizeof values) - 1; i++)
{
accumulator -= values[i];
}
// Return the result of the calculation
return accumulator;
}
double Operation_Multiply(double* values)
{
double accumulator = 0.0;
for(int i = 0; i < (sizeof values) - 1; i++)
{
accumulator *= values[i];
}
// Return the value of the calculation
return accumulator;
}
double Operation_Divide(double* values)
{
double accumulator = 0.0;
for(int i = 0; i < (sizeof values) - 1; i++)
{
accumulator /= values[i];
}
// Return the result of the calculation
return accumulator;
}
Did you remember to call mLogger = new Logger at some point? Did you accidantally delete mLogger before writing to it?
Try running your program in valgrind to see whether it finds any memory errors.
After your edit, the solution seem clear:
Your first line in main() is :
mLogger->WriteEntry("Registering commands...\0");
Here mLogger is a pointer that has never been initialized. This is "undefined behaviour", meaning anything can appen, often bad things.
To fix this you can either make it a "normal" variable, not a pointer or create a Logger instance using new (either at the declaration or as the first line in main).
I suggest you to not use a pointer to be sure the logger is always there and is automatically destroyed.
By the way, it seems like you want to create every instance of objects on the heap using pointers. It's not recommanded if it's not necessary. You should use pointers ONLY if you want to explicitely state the creation (using new) and destruction (using delete) of the instance object. If you just need it in a specific scope, don't use a pointer. You might come from another language like Java or C# where all objects are referenced. If so, you should start learning C++ like a different language to avoid such kind of problem. You should learn about RAII and other C++ scpecific paradigm that you cannot learn in those languages. If you come from C you should too take it as a different language. That might help you avoid complex problems like the one you showed here. May I suggest you read some C++ pointer, references and RAII related questions on stackoverflow.
First, you don't need to create the std::list on the heap. You should just use it as a normal member of the class.
class Logger
{
private:
list<string> mEntries; // no need to use a pointer
public:
Logger() // initialization is automatic, no need to do anything
{
}
~Logger() // clearing and destruction is automatic too, no need to do anything
{
}
//...
};
Next, entryData don't exist in this code so I guess you wanted to use entry. If it's not a typo then you're not providing the definition of entryData that is certainly the source of your problem.
In fact I would have written your class that way instead:
class Logger
{
private:
list<string> mEntries;
public:
// no need for constructor and destructor, use the default ones
// Public Methods
void WriteEntry(const string& entry) // use a const reference to avoid unnecessary copy (even with optimization like NRVO)
{
mEntries.push_back( entry ); // here the list will create a node with a string inside, so this is exactly like calling the copy constructor
}
void DisplayEntries()
{
cout << endl << "**********************" << endl
<< "* Logger Entries *" << endl
<< "**********************" << endl
<< endl;
for(list<string>::iterator it = mEntries.begin();
it != mEntries.end(); ++it) // if you want to avoid unnecessary copies, use ++it instead of it++
{
cout << *it << endl;
}
}
};
What's certain is that your segfault is from usage outside of this class.
Is an instance of Logger being copied anywhere (either through a copy constructor or operator=)? Since you have mEntries as a pointer to a list, if you copy an instance of Logger, they will share the value of the pointer, and when one is destructed, it deletes the list. The original then has a dangling pointer. A quick check is to make the copy constructor and operator= private and not implemented:
private:
void operator=(const Logger &); // not implemented
Logger(const Logger &); // not implemented
When you recompile, the compiler will flag any copies of any Logger instances.
If you need to copy instances of Logger, the fix is to follow the Rule of 3:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_%28C%2B%2B_programming%29
You can do this by eliminating the need for the destructor (by not using a pointer: list<string> mEntries), or by adding the needed code to the copy constructor and operator= to make a deep copy of the list.
You only need to do
list<string> entries;
entries.push_back();
You do not need to create a pointer to entries.
Nothing too obvious, though you typed
mEntries->push_back(string(entryData));
and I htink you meant entry instead of entryData. You also don't need the string conversion on that line, and your function should take entry by const reference.
However, none of these things would cause your program to segfault. What compiler are you using?
You're missing the copy constructor. If the Logger object is copied and the original deleted, you'll be dereferencing memory that was previously deleted.
A simplified example of the problem
Logger a;
{
Logger b;
a=b;
}
a.WriteEntry("Testing");
Add a copy constructor.
Logger(const Logger& item)
{
mEntries = new list<string>();
std::copy(item.mEntries->begin(), item.mEntries->end(), std::back_inserter(*mEntries));
}