I am now using C++ to program a robot using PROS. Pros has a print function, which is taking in a const char*. Now, I'm using lvgl to create my own screen, and I want to replicate the print function. Like the printf() functions, I want it to include variadic params to do the %d effect (so it converts all the %? to the corresponding values). The problem now is about the conversions between functions. I wanted to make a convert function to convert a string and the variadic params into a complete string. I need to input is a string which is like "hey" and I'm unsure what the type name should be. I need to be able to get size, search in it for %ds but I need the function to return a const char* to pass onto the lvgl to pring on the screen. I am having a bad time trying to convert a string into an const char* for the out put of the convert function.
Also, I tried using the input type as a char*, and when I input a string like "hello" is says a error [ISO C++11 does not allow conversion from string literal to 'char ' [-Wwritable-strings]]. But instead, when is use a const char, the error disappears. Anyone knows why?
Thanks everyone for your kind help!
char* and const char* are two flavours of the same thing: C-style strings. These are a series of bytes with a NUL terminator (0-byte). To use these you need to use the C library functions like strdup, strlen and so on. These must be used very carefully as missing out on the terminator, which is all too easy to do by accident, can result in huge problems in the form of buffer-overflow bugs.
std::string is how strings are represented in C++. They're a lot more capable, they can support "wide" characters, or variable length character sets like UTF-8. As there's no NUL terminator in these, they can't be overflowed and are really quite safe to use. Memory allocation is handled by the Standard Library without you having to pay much attention to it.
You can convert back and forth as necessary, but it's usually best to stick to std::string inside of C++ as much as you can.
To convert from C++ to C:
std::string cppstring("test");
const char* c_string = cppstring.c_str();
To convert from C to C++:
const char* c_string = "test";
std::string cppstring(c_string);
Note you can convert from char* (mutable) to const char* (immutable) but not in reverse. Sometimes things are flagged const because you're not allowed to change them, or that changing them would cause huge problems.
You don't really have to "convert" though, you just use char* as you would const char*.
std::string A = "hello"; //< assignment from char* to string
const char* const B = A.c_str(); //< call c_str() method to access the C string
std::string C = B; //< assignment works just fine (with allocation though!)
printf("%s", C.c_str()); //< pass to printf via %s & c_str() method
Related
There is a function which sends data to the server:
int send(
_In_ SOCKET s,
_In_ const char *buf,
_In_ int len,
_In_ int flags
);
Providing length seems to me a little bit weird. I need to write a function, sending a line to the server and wrapping this one such that we don't have to provide length explicitly. I'm a Java-developer and in Java we could just invoke String::length() method, but now we're not in Java. How can I do that, unless providing length as a template parameter? For instance:
void sendLine(SOCKET s, const char *buf)
{
}
Is it possible to implement such a function?
Use std string:
void sendLine(SOCKET s, const std::string& buf) {
send (s, buf.c_str(), buf.size()+1, 0); //+1 will also transmit terminating \0.
}
On a side note: your wrapper function ignores the return value and doesn't take any flags.
you can retrieve the length of C-string by using strlen(const char*) function.
make sure all the strings are null terminated and keep in mind that null-termination (the length grows by 1)
Edit: My answer originally only mentioned std::string. I've now also added std::vector<char> to account for situations where send is not used for strictly textual data.
First of all, you absolutely need a C++ book. You are looking for either the std::string class or for std::vector<char>, both of which are fundamental elements of the language.
Your question is a bit like asking, in Java, how to avoid char[] because you never heard of java.lang.String, or how to avoid arrays in general because you never heard of java.util.ArrayList.
For the first part of this answer, let's assume you are dealing with just text output here, i.e. with output where a char is really meant to be a text character. That's the std::string use case.
Providing lenght seems to me a little bit wierd.
That's the way strings work in C. A C string is really a pointer to a memory location where characters are stored. Normally, C strings are null-terminated. This means that the last character stored for the string is '\0'. It means "the string stops here, and if you move further, you enter illegal territory".
Here is a C-style example:
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>
void f(char const* s)
{
int l = strlen(s); // l = 3
printf(s); // prints "foo"
}
int main()
{
char* test = new char[4]; // avoid new[] in real programs
test[0] = 'f';
test[1] = 'o';
test[2] = 'o';
test[3] = '\0';
f(test);
delete[] test;
}
strlen just counts all characters at the specified position in memory until it finds '\0'. printf just writes all characters at the specified position in memory until it finds '\0'.
So far, so good. Now what happens if someone forgets about the null terminator?
char* test = new char[3]; // don't do this at home, please
test[0] = 'f';
test[1] = 'o';
test[2] = 'o';
f(test); // uh-oh, there is no null terminator...
The result will be undefined behaviour. strlen will keep looking for '\0'. So will printf. The functions will try to read memory they are not supposed to. The program is allowed to do anything, including crashing. The evil thing is that most likely, nothing will happen for a while because a '\0' just happens to be stored there in memory, until one day you are not so lucky anymore.
That's why C functions are sometimes made safer by requiring you to explicitly specify the number of characters. Your send is such a function. It works fine even without null-terminated strings.
So much for C strings. And now please don't use them in your C++ code. Use std::string. It is designed to be compatible with C functions by providing the c_str() member function, which returns a null-terminated char const * pointing to the contents of the string, and it of course has a size() member function to tell you the number of characters without the null-terminated character (e.g. for a std::string representing the word "foo", size() would be 3, not 4, and 3 is also what a C function like yours would probably expect, but you have to look at the documentation of the function to find out whether it needs the number of visible characters or number of elements in memory).
In fact, with std::string you can just forget about the whole null-termination business. Everything is nicely automated. std::string is exactly as easy and safe to use as java.lang.String.
Your sendLine should thus become:
void sendLine(SOCKET s, std::string const& line)
{
send(s, line.c_str(), line.size());
}
(Passing a std::string by const& is the normal way of passing big objects in C++. It's just for performance, but it's such a widely-used convention that your code would look strange if you just passed std::string.)
How can I do that, unless providing lenght as a template parameter?
This is a misunderstanding of how templates work. With a template, the length would have to be known at compile time. That's certainly not what you intended.
Now, for the second part of the answer, perhaps you aren't really dealing with text here. It's unlikely, as the name "sendLine" in your example sounds very much like text, but perhaps you are dealing with raw data, and a char in your output does not represent a text character but just a value to be interpreted as something completely different, such as the contents of an image file.
In that case, std::string is a poor choice. Your output could contain '\0' characters that do not have the meaning of "data ends here", but which are part of the normal contents. In other words, you don't really have strings anymore, you have a range of char elements in which '\0' has no special meaning.
For this situation, C++ offers the std::vector template, which you can use as std::vector<char>. It is also designed to be usable with C functions by providing a member function that returns a char pointer. Here's an example:
void sendLine(SOCKET s, std::vector<char> const& data)
{
send(s, &data[0], data.size());
}
(The unusual &data[0] syntax means "pointer to the first element of the encapsulated data. C++11 has nicer-to-read ways of doing this, but &data[0] also works in older versions of C++.)
Things to keep in mind:
std::string is like String in Java.
std::vector is like ArrayList in Java.
std::string is for a range of char with the meaning of text, std::vector<char> is for a range of char with the meaning of raw data.
std::string and std::vector are designed to work together with C APIs.
Do not use new[] in C++.
Understand the null termination of C strings.
I am trying to convert an int to a cstring. I've decided to read the int into a regular string via stringstream, and then read the string into a char array. The following seems to be working, but I'm wondering if I'm just getting lucky with my compiler. Does the code seem sound? Thanks!
int zip = 1234;
char zipString[30];
stringstream str;
str << zip;
str >> zipString;
cout << zipString;
You can get a C++ std::string from the stream's str() function, and an immutable C-style zero-terminated string from the string's c_str() function:
std::string cpp_string = str.str();
char const * c_string = cpp_string.c_str();
You might be tempted to combine these into a single expression, str.str().c_str(), but that would be wrong; the C++ string will be destroyed before you can do anything with the pointer.
What you are doing will work, as long as you're sure that the buffer is large enough; but using the C++ string removes the danger of overflowing the buffer. In general, it's best to avoid C-style strings unless you need to use an API that requires them (or, in extreme circumstances, as an optimisation to avoid memory allocation). std::string is usually safer and easier to work with.
Unless you have a specific reason that you need an array of char instead of a standard string, I'd use the latter. Although it's not strictly necessary in this case, I'd also normally use a Boost lexical_cast instead of explicitly moving things through a stringstream to do the conversion:
std::string zipString = lexical_cast<std::string>(zip);
Then, if you really need the result as a c-style string, you can use zipString.c_str() to get that (though it's still different in one way -- you can't modify what that returns).
In this specific case it doesn't gain you a lot, but consistent use for conversions on this general order adds up, and if you're going to do that, you might as well use it here too.
The std::string's c_str() member function returns a const char* (aka a C-style string).
std::string str = "world";
printf("hello, %s", str.c_str());
I have been working with C++ strings and trying to load char * strings into std::string by using C functions such as strcpy(). Since strcpy() takes char * as a parameter, I have to cast it which goes something like this:
std::string destination;
unsigned char *source;
strcpy((char*)destination.c_str(), (char*)source);
The code works fine and when I run the program in a debugger, the value of *source is stored in destination, but for some odd reason it won't print out with the statement
std::cout << destination;
I noticed that if I use
std::cout << destination.c_str();
The value prints out correctly and all is well. Why does this happen? Is there a better method of copying an unsigned char* or char* into a std::string (stringstreams?) This seems to only happen when I specify the string as foo.c_str() in a copying operation.
Edit: To answer the question "why would you do this?", I am using strcpy() as a plain example. There are other times that it's more complex than assignment. For example, having to copy only X amount of string A into string B using strncpy() or passing a std::string to a function from a C library that takes a char * as a parameter for a buffer.
Here's what you want
std::string destination = source;
What you're doing is wrong on so many levels... you're writing over the inner representation of a std::string... I mean... not cool man... it's much more complex than that, arrays being resized, read-only memory... the works.
This is not a good idea at all for two reasons:
destination.c_str() is a const pointer and casting away it's const and writing to it is undefined behavior.
You haven't set the size of the string, meaning that it won't even necessealy have a large enough buffer to hold the string which is likely to cause an access violation.
std::string has a constructor which allows it to be constructed from a char* so simply write:
std::string destination = source
Well what you are doing is undefined behavior. Your c_str() returns a const char * and is not meant to be assigned to. Why not use the defined constructor or assignment operator.
std::string defines an implicit conversion from const char* to std::string... so use that.
You decided to cast away an error as c_str() returns a const char*, i.e., it does not allow for writing to its underlying buffer. You did everything you could to get around that and it didn't work (you shouldn't be surprised at this).
c_str() returns a const char* for good reason. You have no idea if this pointer points to the string's underlying buffer. You have no idea if this pointer points to a memory block large enough to hold your new string. The library is using its interface to tell you exactly how the return value of c_str() should be used and you're ignoring that completely.
Do not do what you are doing!!!
I repeat!
DO NOT DO WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!
That it seems to sort of work when you do some weird things is a consequence of how the string class was implemented. You are almost certainly writing in memory you shouldn't be and a bunch of other bogus stuff.
When you need to interact with a C function that writes to a buffer there's two basic methods:
std::string read_from_sock(int sock) {
char buffer[1024] = "";
int recv = read(sock, buffer, 1024);
if (recv > 0) {
return std::string(buffer, buffer + recv);
}
return std::string();
}
Or you might try the peek method:
std::string read_from_sock(int sock) {
int recv = read(sock, 0, 0, MSG_PEEK);
if (recv > 0) {
std::vector<char> buf(recv);
recv = read(sock, &buf[0], recv, 0);
return std::string(buf.begin(), buf.end());
}
return std::string();
}
Of course, these are not very robust versions...but they illustrate the point.
First you should note that the value returned by c_str is a const char* and must not be modified. Actually it even does not have to point to the internal buffer of string.
In response to your edit:
having to copy only X amount of string A into string B using strncpy()
If string A is a char array, and string B is std::string, and strlen(A) >= X, then you can do this:
B.assign(A, A + X);
passing a std::string to a function from a C library that takes a char
* as a parameter for a buffer
If the parameter is actually const char *, you can use c_str() for that. But if it is just plain char *, and you are using a C++11 compliant compiler, then you can do the following:
c_function(&B[0]);
However, you need to ensure that there is room in the string for the data(same as if you were using a plain c-string), which you can do with a call to the resize() function. If the function writes an unspecified amount of characters to the string as a null-terminated c-string, then you will probably want to truncate the string afterward, like this:
B.resize(B.find('\0'));
The reason you can safely do this in a C++11 compiler and not a C++03 compiler is that in C++03, strings were not guaranteed by the standard to be contiguous, but in C++11, they are. If you want the guarantee in C++03, then you can use std::vector<char> instead.
I have the function below in a file called WiServer.h for Arduino.
GETrequest(uint8* ipAddr, int port, char* hostName, char* URL);
Now the problem is I need to concatenate an int value (setting1) to the char* URL parameter like the below for example.
"twittermood.php?status=sendTweet&setting1="+setting1
I get an error:
invalid conversion from const char* to char*
How do I fix it?
You've gotten decent generic C++ advice, but for the special case of Arduino on an 8-bit AVR microcontroller I think you need platform-specific advice:
The Arduino runtime provides a String object. Your question is probably covered by these examples.
Because of the very limited RAM space on Arduino it is common to use special attributes to put constant strings in flash (essentially ROM) which requires different instructions to access. AVR code built with GCC is typically built on top of AVR Libc which has support for operating on a mix of constant strings and RAM strings. You must be explicit in your code and choose the right operations. This requires at least a basic understanding of how C strings work and how pointers work. I'm not sure how much of this cleverness is automatically provided by the Arduino String, but without this cleverness all of your string constants will end up copied into RAM at boot and will take up those precious bytes all the time.
If RAM space becomes a problem or you are working on an AVR application that does extensive string manipulation you need to learn how to use the mix of PGM Space operations (string functions that can work on read-only strings in flash) and regular C-style RAM-based string operations.
Use std::string, rather than C strings. Use string streams, rather than trying to concatenate non-string values to strings:
std::ostringstream oss;
oss << "twittermood.php?status=sendTweet&setting1=" << setting1;
use(oss.str()); // or use(oss.str().c_str());
If that API really needs a non-const string (given that it doesn't even take the length of the string, I suppose it's just a buggy API disregarding const), copy the string to a buffer and pass that:
const std::string& str = oss.str();
std::vector<char> buffer(str.begin(), str.end());
buffer.push_back('\0');
GETrequest(addr, port, &buffer[0], c);
As for what really happens when you do what you do:
"twittermood.php?status=sendTweet&setting1=" is an rvalue of the type char[43], which implicitly converts to const char*, a pointer to the first character. To that you add an integer, by this forming a new pointer of the type const char* pointing to some more or less random memory location. I suppose you try to pass this as the char* to your API function, for which the const would have to be dropped.
A C++ compiler, however, will never implicitly drop a const — for your own good.
Use a std::string, not a char*, for this sort of work. A char* in C is extremely basic and if you're not familiar with how C works, very easy to use wrong.
If you need to use char*, look into strcpy, strcat and snprintf. But these functions are very dangerous in a novice's hands and can lead to memory corruption and crashing.
You can use an ostringstream for this:
#include <sstream>
// ...
std::ostringstream os;
os << "twittermood.php?status=sendTweet&setting1=" << setting1;
GETrequest(addr, port, hostname, os.str().c_str());
Use std::string instead of char* and maybe a std::stringstream for your concatination. But first about your errors:
Your problem is that "twittermood.php?status=sendTweet&setting1=" will get you a const char*, which can't be implicitely converted to a char*. If you are really sure that GETrequest doesn't try to change the value of its URL parameter, you can use const_cast<char*>(...) on your const char* variable to cast away the constness. However, do this only if you are absolutely sure it won't be changed (don't lie to the compiler about constness (or anything really)).
Even if you do that "twittermood.php?status=sendTweet&setting1="+setting1 won't do what you think it does. As I said your string constant will give you a const char*, which doesn't have any knowledge about string operations. So adding an intto it won't concat that int to the string, but instead do some pointerarithmetic, so if you are lucky and your int was small enough you get only a part of the URL, otherwise you will address something completely different.
Posting C solution for completeness:
const char ctext[] = "twittermood.php?status=sendTweet&setting1=";
char text[sizeof(ctext) + 20];
snprintf(text, sizeof(text), "%s%i", ctext, setting1);
std strings and streams are much nicer/safer to use.
In a recent question, I learned that there are situations where you just gotta pass a char* instead of a std::string. I really like string, and for situations where I just need to pass an immutable string, it works fine to use .c_str(). The way I see it, it's a good idea to take advantage of the string class for its ease of manipulation. However, for functions that require an input, I end up doing something like this:
std::string str;
char* cstr = new char[500]; // I figure dynamic allocation is a good idea just
getstr(cstr); // in case I want the user to input the limit or
str = cstr; // something. Not sure if it matters.
delete[] cstr;
printw(str.c_str());
Obviously, this isn't so, uh, straightforward. Now, I'm pretty new to C++ so I can't really see the forest for the trees. In a situation like this, where every input is going to have to get converted to a C string and back to take advantage of string's helpful methods, is it just a better idea to man up and get used to C-style string manipulation? Is this kind of constant back-and-forth conversion too stupid to deal with?
In the example you give, you can generally read a line into a std::string using the std::getline function: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/getline/
Of course this doesn't do everything that a curses library does. If you need a non-const char* so that some C function can read into it, you can use a vector<char>. You can create a vector<char> from a string, and vice-versa:
std::string a("hello, world");
std::vector<char> b(a.begin(), a.end());
// if we want a string consisting of every byte in the vector
std::string c(b.begin(), b.end());
// if we want a string only up to a NUL terminator in the vector
b.push_back(0);
std::string d(&b[0]);
So your example becomes:
std::vector<char> cstr(500);
getnstr(&cstr[0], 500);
printw(&cstr[0]);
Most std::string::c_str() implementations (if not all of them) simply return a pointer to an internal buffer. No overhead whatsoever.
Beware however that c_str() returns a const char*, not a char*. And that the pointer will become invalid after the function call. So you cannot use it if the function does anything like writing back into the passed string or makes a copy of the pointer.