For my programming project, I am supposed to write a program that sorts integers on a disk (i.e. offline sort). I am first supposed to generate some random integers, write all of them, and read two of those integers for swapping, and write them back to the disk, and repeat those steps until the numbers are sorted. I am able to generate random numbers just fine, and had no problem opening the file, but it crashes when an attempt is made to write to the file. Here is the fragment of the code for the program that I used to implement the sort, that contains the sorting algorithm, and the segment of the code that crashes my program:
void ReadAndWrite(int & rand_ints, int & pos_ints)
{
int rand_ints2 = 0;
GetNumber(pos_ints);
srand(time(0));
fstream finout;
finout.open(SORTFILE, ios::binary | ios::in | ios::out);
if (finout.is_open())
{
for (int i = 0; i < pos_ints; ++i)
{
rand_ints = rand() % 5;
finout.write(reinterpret_cast <char *>(rand_ints), sizeof(int) * 1);
}
for (int i = 0; i < pos_ints; ++i)
{
finout.seekg(ios::beg);
finout.read(reinterpret_cast <char *>(rand_ints), sizeof(int) * 2);
bubbleSort(&rand_ints, 2, sizeof(int), compare_ints);
finout.seekp(ios::app);
finout.write(reinterpret_cast <char *>(rand_ints), sizeof(int) * 2);
}
finout.close();
}
else
{
cout << "File not opened!" << endl;
}
}
void GetNumber(int & pos_ints)
{
cout << "Enter a positive number: ";
cin >> pos_ints;
}
void bubbleSort(void * base, size_t num, size_t width, int(*compar) (const void *, const void *))
{
bool done = false;//Allows us to enter loop first time
int hi = num - 1;//largest index is 1 less than the size of the array
while (!done)
{
done = true;//assume the list is sorted
for (int i = 0; i<hi; i++)
{
//pass thru the array up to 'hi'
//if (arr[i+1]<arr[i])
if (compar((void *)(((char *)base) + width*(i + 1)), (void *)(((char *)base) + width*(i))) < 0)
{
//if any pair are out of order
done = false;//the list is not sorted
//int temp = arr[i];//swap them
void * tempp = (void *) new char[width];
memcpy_s(tempp, width, (((char *)base) + width*(i)), width);
//arr[i] = arr[i+1];
memcpy_s((((char *)base) + width*(i)), width, ((char *)base) + width*(i + 1), width);
//arr[i+1]=temp;
memcpy_s(((char *)base) + width*(i + 1), width, tempp, width);
delete[] tempp;
}
}
hi--;//at the end of a pass, largest item in that pass is in proper place; no need to go this far next time
}
}
int compare_ints(const void * arg1, const void * arg2)
{
int return_value = 0;
if (*(int *)arg1 < *(int *)arg2)
return_value = -1;
else if (*(int *)arg1 > *(int *)arg2)
return_value = 1;
return return_value;
}
It crashes on the line of code finout.write(reinterpret_cast (rand_ints), sizeof(int) * 1); within the first for loop (line 52), with the following error: Exception thrown at 0x55916D16 (msvcp140d.dll) in ExternalSort.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0x00000001.
Is there a way to fix this error and make this sorting program work? Tried everything I could have possibly tried, and I can't see a line of my code to cause the program to crash or cause other problems.
Since rand_ints is of type int, you probably mean reinterpret_cast<char *>(&rand_ints) (note the &). Otherwise, you'll be making a pointer out of an integral value.
OTOH, trying to read two adjacent integers into the address of a single integer variable is very likely to cause problems.
Looking more deeply into your sorting algorithm, it seems to me that you attempted to generalize it for data elements of any size, and not just ints. However, it is still clearly array-oriented; if you wanted to deal with files, you probably have to pass the function either a filename or a fstream reference.
Also, unless you're required to use Bubble Sort, I'd strongly advise you against it, especially for on-disk sorting, unless you make sure your data set is very, very small (say, no more than a hundred numbers). For in-place sorting, I'd advise you to use Quick Sort.
Related
So i'm trying to write a function which would get input from keyboard and store it in the 2d dynamic array. n is the number of lines (tried with 1-4 lines), m is the number of characters per line (256 in my case). I've read plenty about dynamic arrays and the use of new and the code seems totaly fine to me, but i keep getting this error when i try to enter the text: Access violation reading location 0x00000000. Can't figure out why. Please help.
void KeyInput (char **string, unsigned int n, unsigned int m)
{
cout<<endl<<"Input from keyboard"<<endl;
string=new char* [n];
for(unsigned int i = 0; i < n; i++ )
string[i]=new char[m];
for(unsigned int i = 0; i < n; i++ )
gets(string[i]);
}
can you give more information on where you are getting the access violation? I tried the following code (Visual Studio 2010, Window 7 Professional) and did not get an error. Note that I did change the characters per line to 15 instead of 255 as I wanted to test boundary conditions without a lot of typing.
Your function seems to work fine on my machine, however you do have a latent buffer-overflow using gets as it does not check for the length of the string. Remember that gets will append a null-terminator for you, so if in your case you enter exactly 255 characters you will overflow your buffer by one.
void KeyInput(char** string, unsigned int n, unsigned int m);
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
char* strArray;
KeyInput(&strArray, 4, 15);
return 0;
}
void KeyInput(char** string, unsigned int n, unsigned int m)
{
string = new char*[n];
for(unsigned int i = 0; i < n; i++)
{
string[i] = new char[m];
}
for(unsigned int i = 0; i < n; i++)
{
gets(string[i]);
}
}
(also ignore the hideous _tmain and _TCHAR stuff, they are Windows idiosyncrasies :) ).
Finally, unless this is an assignment (or an exercise for self learning), do what 40two suggested and use STL to make your life easy.
Use a vector of strings, take advantage of the force that STL has (use the force Luke see code below how):
void KeyInput (std::vector<std::string>& str_vec, int const n)
{
std::cout << "\nInput from keyboard" << std::endl;
for (auto i = 0; i < n; i++) {
std::string tmp;
std::getline(std::cin, tmp);
str_vec.push_back(tmp);
}
}
Update or Why your C++ teachers are wrong:
void KeyInput(char ***string, unsigned int n, unsigned int m)
{
std::cout << "\nInput from keyboard" << std::endl;
*string = new char*[n];
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < n; i++)
(*string)[i] = new char[m];
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < n; i++)
std::gets((*string)[i]);
}
int main()
{
char **string = 0;
KeyInput(&string, 4, 100);
for (auto i = 0; i < 4; ++i) std::cout << string[i] << std::endl;
return 0;
}
You need triple pointers in order to pass the 2d array by reference and to be properly filled (OMG!!!).
The user can enter only limited length strings (e.g., 99) don't forget strings have one character at the end (i.e., '/0' the null character).
You have to take care of the memory allocated and deleted later in order to avoid memory leaks.
If you want to shoot your self in the foot continue to program like this.
I have a rather unexpected issue with one of my functions. Let me explain.
I'm writing a calibration algorithm and since I want to do some grid search (non-continuous optimization), I'm creating my own mesh - different combinations of probabilities.
The size of the grid and the grid itself are computed recursively (I know...).
So in order:
Get variables
Compute corresponding size recursively
Allocate memory for the grid
Pass the empty grid by reference and fill it recursively
The problem I have is after step 4 once I try to retrieve this grid. During step 4, I 'print' on the console the results to check them and everything is fine. I computed several grids with several variables and they all match the results I'm expecting. However, as soon as the grid is taken out of the recursive function, the last column is filled with 0 (all the values from before are replace in this column only).
I tried allocating one extra column for the grid in step 3 but this only made the problem worse (-3e303 etc. values). Also I have the error no matter what size I compute it with (very small to very large), so I assume it isn't a memory error (or at least a 'lack of memory' error). Finally the two functions used and their call have been listed below, this has been quickly programmed, so some variables might seem kind of useless - I know. However I'm always open to your comments (plus I'm no expert in C++ - hence this thread).
void size_Grid_Computation(int nVars, int endPoint, int consideredVariable, int * indexes, int &sum, int nChoices)
{
/** Remember to initialize r at 1 !! - we exclude var_0 and var_(m-1) (first and last variables) in this algorithm **/
int endPoint2 = 0;
if (consideredVariable < nVars - 2)
{
for (indexes[consideredVariable] = 0; indexes[consideredVariable] < endPoint; indexes[consideredVariable] ++)
{
endPoint2 = endPoint - indexes[consideredVariable];
size_Grid_Computation(nVars, endPoint2, consideredVariable + 1, indexes, sum, nChoices);
}
}
else
{
for (int i = 0; i < nVars - 2; i++)
{
sum -= indexes[i];
}
sum += nChoices;
return;
}
}
The above function is for the grid size. Below for the grid itself -
void grid_Creation(double* choicesVector, double** varVector, int consideredVariable, int * indexes, int endPoint, int nVars, int &r)
{
if (consideredVariable > nVars-1)
return;
for (indexes[consideredVariable] = 0; indexes[consideredVariable] < endPoint; indexes[consideredVariable]++)
{
if (consideredVariable == nVars - 1)
{
double sum = 0.0;
for (int j = 0; j <= consideredVariable; j++)
{
varVector[r][j] = choicesVector[indexes[j]];
sum += varVector[r][j];
printf("%lf\t", varVector[r][j]);
}
varVector[r][nVars - 1] = 1 - sum;
printf("%lf row %d\n", varVector[r][nVars - 1],r+1);
r += 1;
}
grid_Creation(choicesVector, varVector, consideredVariable + 1, indexes, endPoint - indexes[consideredVariable], nVars, r);
}
}
Finally the call
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main()
{
int nVars = 5;
int gridPrecision = 3;
int sum1 = 0;
int r = 0;
int size = 0;
int * index, * indexes;
index = (int *) calloc(nVars - 1, sizeof(int));
indexes = (int *) calloc(nVars, sizeof(int));
for (index[0] = 0; index[0] < gridPrecision + 1; index[0] ++)
{
size_Grid_Computation(nVars, gridPrecision + 1 - index[0], 1, index, size, gridPrecision + 1);
}
double * Y;
Y = (double *) calloc(gridPrecision + 1, sizeof(double));
for (int i = 0; i <= gridPrecision; i++)
{
Y[i] = (double) i/ (double) gridPrecision;
}
double ** varVector;
varVector = (double **) calloc(size, sizeof(double *));
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++)
{
varVector[i] = (double *) calloc(nVars, sizeof(double *));
}
grid_Creation(Y, varVector, 0, indexes, gridPrecision + 1, nVars - 1, r);
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++)
{
printf("%lf\n", varVector[i][nVars - 1]);
}
}
I left my barbarian 'printf', they help narrow down the problem. Most likely, I have forgotten or butchered one memory allocation. But I can't see which one. Anyway, thanks for the help!
It seems to me that you have a principal mis-design, namely your 2D array. What you are programming here is not a 2D array but an emulation of it. It only makes sense if you want to have a sort of sparse data structure where you may leave out parts. In your case it looks as if it is just a plain old matrix that you need.
Nowadays it is neither appropriate in C nor in C++ to program like this.
In C, since that seems what you are after, inside functions you declare matrices even with dynamic bounds as
double A[n][m];
If you fear that this could smash your "stack", you may allocate it dynamically
double (*B)[m] = malloc(sizeof(double[n][m]));
You pass such beasts to functions by putting the bounds first in the parameter list
void toto(size_t n, size_t m, double X[n][m]) {
...
}
Once you have clean and readable code, you will find your bug much easier.
This is a routine that I believe is for C. I copied it (legally) out a book and am trying to get it to compile and run in visual studio 2008. I would like to keep it as a C++ program. Lots of programming experience in IBM mainframe assembler but none in C++. Your help is greatly appreciated. I think just a couple of simple changes but I have read tutorials and beat on this for hours - getting nowhere. Getting a lot (4) of error C2440 '=' : cannot convert form 'void*' to to 'int*' errors in statements past the reedsolomon function: Thanks so much! Program follows:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int wd[50] = {131,153,175,231,5,184,89,239,149,29,181,153,175,191,153,175,191,159,231,3,127,44,12,164,59,209,104,254,150,45};
int nd = 30, nc=20, i, j, k, *log, *alog, *c, gf=256, pp=301;
/* The following is routine which calculates the error correction codewords
for a given data codeword string of length "nd", stored as an integer array wd[].
The function ReedSolomon()first generates log and antilog tables for the Galois
Field of size "gf" (in the case of ECC 200, 28) with prime modulus "pp"
(in the case of ECC 200, 301), then uses them in the function prod(), first to
calculate coefficients of the generator polynomial of order "nc" and then to
calculate "nc" additional check codewords which are appended to the data in wd[].*/
/* "prod(x,y,log,alog,gf)" returns the product "x" times "y" */
int prod(int x, int y, int *log, int *alog, int gf)
{if (!x || !y)
return 0;
else
return alog[(log[x] + log[y]) % (gf-1)];
}
/* "ReedSolomon(wd,nd,nc,gf.pp)" takes "nd" data codeword values in wd[] */
/* and adds on "nc" check codewords, all within GF(gf) where "gf" is a */
/* power of 2 and "pp" is the value of its prime modulus polynomial */
void ReedSolomon(int *wd, int nd, int nc, int gf, int pp)
{int i, j, k, *log,*alog,*c;
/* allocate, then generate the log & antilog arrays: */
log = malloc(sizeof(int) * gf);
alog = malloc(sizeof(int) * gf);
log[0] = 1-gf; alog[0] = 1;
for (i = 1; i < gf; i++)
{alog[i] = alog[i-1] * 2;
if (alog[i] >= gf) alog[i] ^= pp;
log[alog[i]] = i;
}
/* allocate, then generate the generator polynomial coefficients: */
c = malloc(sizeof(int) * (nc+1));
for (i=1; i<=nc; i++) c[i] = 0; c[0] = 1;
for (i=1; i<=nc; i++)
{c[i] = c[i-1];
for (j=i-1; j>=1; j--)
{c[j] = c[j-1] ^ prod(c[j],alog[i],log,alog,gf);
}
c[0] = prod(c[0],alog[i],log,alog,gf);
}
/* clear, then generate "nc" checkwords in the array wd[] : */
for (i=nd; i<=(nd+nc); i++) wd[i] = 0;
for (i=0; i<nd; i++)
{k = wd[nd] ^ wd[i] ;
for (j=0; j<nc; j++)
{wd[nd+j] = wd[nd+j+1] ^ prod(k,c[nc-j-1],log, alog,gf);
}
}
free(c);
free(alog);
free(log);
return ();
}
int main ()
{reedsolomon (50,30,20,256,301);
for (i = 1; i < 51; i++)
{cout<< i; "="; wd[i];}
cout<<"HEY, you, I'm alive! Oh, and Hello World!\n";
cin.get();
return 1;
}
In C++, a void pointer can't be implicitly cast to a different pointer.
So instead of
int *pInt;
pInt = malloc(sizeof(int) * 5);
You need to say
int *pInt;
pInt = (int *) malloc(sizeof(int) * 5);
or preferably
int *pInt = new int[5];
(with a matching delete[] instead of free), or preferably preferably use a vector if it's intended to be dynamic.
At the beginning of the program type: #include <cstdlib> . If you do not include this library, then malloc will not work. In C++, void* to int* is not an automatic conversion, in lines: 31 32 and 40 you need to cast to int* e.g: log = (int *)malloc(sizeof(int) * gf);
At main funcion, line 63 you're calling the function as reedsolomon, it should be ReedSolomon, the way you declared it.
Also, in "void ReedSolomon(int *wd, int nd, int nc, int gf, int pp)" when you call the function in the main, you say ReedSolomon (50,30,20,256,301); so you are asigning an int value to a pointer to int, that's a type clash. I'm not sure what it is you want to do with wd.
Next time, please post the errors from the compiler so people dont have to compile the code themselves to check and see whats wrong.
Also a good technique which will save you a lot of time is to do a google search on the error the compiler gives you (it is very likely somebody already had that same mistake), and also read a C++ book to get acquainted with the language.
Cheers!
C++ requires that you cast the return value of malloc to whatever type of pointer you're assigning it to. So e.g. log = malloc(sizeof(int) * gf); needs to become log = (int *) malloc(sizeof(int) * gf);.
You should type cast when assigning a pointer to the return of malloc.
Example:
log = reinterpret_cast<int*>(malloc(sizeof(int) * gf));
char *stringmult(int n)
{
char *x = "hello ";
for (int i=0; i<n; ++i)
{
char *y = new char[strlen(x) * 2];
strcpy(y,x);
strcat(y,x);
delete[] x;
x=y;
}
return x;
}
I'm trying to figure out what the flaws of this segment is. For one, it deletes x and then tries to copy it's values over to y. Another is that y is twice the size of x and that y never gets deleted. Is there anything that I'm missing? And also, I need to figure out how to get algorithm performance. If you've got a quick link where you learned how, I'd appreciate it.
y needs one more byte than strlen(x) * 2 to make space for the terminating nul character -- just for starters.
Anyway, as you're returning a newed memory area, it's up to the caller to delete it (eek).
What you're missing, it seems to me, is std::string...!-)
As for performance, copying N characters with strcpy is O(N); concatenating N1 characters to a char array with a previous strlen of N2 is O(N1+N2) (std::string is faster as it keeps the length of the string in an O(1)-accessible attribute!-). So just sum N+N**2 for N up to whatever your limit of interest is (you can ignore the N+ part if all you want is a big-O estimate since it's clearly going to drop away for larger and larger values of N!-).
For starters delete[] x; operates for the first time round the loop on some static memory. Not good.
It looks like an attempt to return a buffer containing 2^n copies of the string "hello ". So the fastest way to do that would be to figure out the number of copies, then allocate a big enough buffer for the whole result, then fill it with the content and return it.
void repeat_string(const std::string &str, int count, std::vector<char> &result)
{
result.resize(str.size() * count);
for (int n = 0; n < count; n++)
str.copy(&result[n * s.size()], s.size());
}
void foo(int power, std::vector<char> &result)
{
repeat_string("hello ", 1 << (power + 1), result);
}
no need to call strlen() in a loop - only call it once;
when new is called no space is requested for the null-character - will cause undefined behaviour;
should use strcpy instead of strcat - you already know where to copy the second string and findig the end of string by strcat requires extra computation;
delete[] is used on a statically allocated string literal - will cause undefined behaviour;
memory is constantly reallocated although you know the result length well in advance - memory reallocation is quite expensive
You should instead compute the result length at once and allocate memory at once and pass the char* as an in-parameter:
char* stringMult(const char* what, int n)
{
const size_t sourceLen = strlen( what );
int i;
size_t resultLen = sourceLen;
// this computation can be done more cleverly and faster
for( i = 0; i < n; i++ ) {
resultLen *= 2;
}
const int numberOfCopies = resultLen / sourceLen;
char* result = new char[resultLen + 1];
char* whereToWrite = result;
for( i = 0; i < numberOfCopies; i++ ) {
strcpy( whereToWrite, what );
whereToWrite += sourceLen;
}
return result;
}
Certain parts of my implementation can be optimized but still it is much better and (I hope) contains no undefined-behaviour class errors.
you have to add one while allocating space for Y for NULL terminating string
Check the code at below location http://codepad.org/tkGhuUDn
char * stringmult (int n)
{
int i;
size_t m;
for (i = 0, m = 1; i < n; ++i; m *= 2);
char * source = "hello ";
int source_len = strlen(source);
char * target = malloc(source_len*m+1) * sizeof(char));
char * tmp = target;
for (i = 0; i < m; ++i) {
strcpy(tmp, source);
tmp += source_len;
}
*tmp = '\0';
return target;
}
Here a better version in plain C. Most of the drawbacks of your code have been eliminated, i.e. deleting a non-allocated pointer, too many uses of strlen and new.
Nonetheless, my version may imply the same memory leak as your version, as the caller is responsible to free the string afterwards.
Edit: corrected my code, thanks to sharptooth.
char* string_mult(int n)
{
const char* x = "hello ";
char* y;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
{
if ( i == 0)
{
y = (char*) malloc(strlen(x)*sizeof(char));
strcpy(y, x);
}
else
{
y = (char*)realloc(y, strlen(x)*(i+1));
strcat(y, x);
}
}
return y;
}
Nobody is going to point out that "y" is in fact being deleted?
Not even one reference to Schlmeiel the Painter?
But the first thing I'd do with this algorithm is:
int l = strlen(x);
int log2l = 0;
int log2n = 0;
int ncopy = n;
while (log2l++, l >>= 1);
while (log2n++, n >>= 1);
if (log2l+log2n >= 8*(sizeof(void*)-1)) {
cout << "don't even bother trying, you'll run out of virtual memory first";
}
What is the accepted/most commonly used way to manipulate dynamic (with all dimensions not known until runtime) multi-dimensional arrays in C and/or C++.
I'm trying to find the cleanest way to accomplish what this Java code does:
public static void main(String[] args){
Scanner sc=new Scanner(System.in);
int rows=sc.nextInt();
int cols=sc.nextInt();
int[][] data=new int[rows][cols];
manipulate(data);
}
public static void manipulate(int[][] data){
for(int i=0;i<data.length;i++)
for(int j=0;j<data[0].length.j++){
System.out.print(data[i][j]);
}
}
(reads from std_in just to clarify that dimensions aren't known until runtime).
Edit:I noticed that this question is pretty popular even though it's pretty old. I don't actually agree with the top voted answer. I think the best choice for C is to use a single-dimensional array as Guge said below "You can alloc rowscolssizeof(int) and access it by table[row*cols+col].".
There is a number of choices with C++, if you really like boost or stl then the answers below might be preferable, but the simplest and probably fastest choice is to use a single dimensional array as in C.
Another viable choice in C and C++ if you want the [][] syntax is lillq's answer down at the bottom is manually building the array with lots of malloc's.
Use boost::multi_array.
As in your example, the only thing you need to know at compile time is the number of dimensions. Here is the first example in the documentation :
#include "boost/multi_array.hpp"
#include <cassert>
int
main () {
// Create a 3D array that is 3 x 4 x 2
typedef boost::multi_array<double, 3> array_type;
typedef array_type::index index;
array_type A(boost::extents[3][4][2]);
// Assign values to the elements
int values = 0;
for(index i = 0; i != 3; ++i)
for(index j = 0; j != 4; ++j)
for(index k = 0; k != 2; ++k)
A[i][j][k] = values++;
// Verify values
int verify = 0;
for(index i = 0; i != 3; ++i)
for(index j = 0; j != 4; ++j)
for(index k = 0; k != 2; ++k)
assert(A[i][j][k] == verify++);
return 0;
}
Edit: As suggested in the comments, here is a "simple" example application that let you define the multi-dimensional array size at runtime, asking from the console input.
Here is an example output of this example application (compiled with the constant saying it's 3 dimensions) :
Multi-Array test!
Please enter the size of the dimension 0 : 4
Please enter the size of the dimension 1 : 6
Please enter the size of the dimension 2 : 2
Text matrix with 3 dimensions of size (4,6,2) have been created.
Ready!
Type 'help' for the command list.
>read 0.0.0
Text at (0,0,0) :
""
>write 0.0.0 "This is a nice test!"
Text "This is a nice test!" written at position (0,0,0)
>read 0.0.0
Text at (0,0,0) :
"This is a nice test!"
>write 0,0,1 "What a nice day!"
Text "What a nice day!" written at position (0,0,1)
>read 0.0.0
Text at (0,0,0) :
"This is a nice test!"
>read 0.0.1
Text at (0,0,1) :
"What a nice day!"
>write 3,5,1 "This is the last text!"
Text "This is the last text!" written at position (3,5,1)
>read 3,5,1
Text at (3,5,1) :
"This is the last text!"
>exit
The important parts in the code are the main function where we get the dimensions from the user and create the array with :
const unsigned int DIMENSION_COUNT = 3; // dimension count for this test application, change it at will :)
// here is the type of the multi-dimensional (DIMENSION_COUNT dimensions here) array we want to use
// for this example, it own texts
typedef boost::multi_array< std::string , DIMENSION_COUNT > TextMatrix;
// this provide size/index based position for a TextMatrix entry.
typedef std::tr1::array<TextMatrix::index, DIMENSION_COUNT> Position; // note that it can be a boost::array or a simple array
/* This function will allow the user to manipulate the created array
by managing it's commands.
Returns true if the exit command have been called.
*/
bool process_command( const std::string& entry, TextMatrix& text_matrix );
/* Print the position values in the standard output. */
void display_position( const Position& position );
int main()
{
std::cout << "Multi-Array test!" << std::endl;
// get the dimension informations from the user
Position dimensions; // this array will hold the size of each dimension
for( int dimension_idx = 0; dimension_idx < DIMENSION_COUNT; ++dimension_idx )
{
std::cout << "Please enter the size of the dimension "<< dimension_idx <<" : ";
// note that here we should check the type of the entry, but it's a simple example so lets assume we take good numbers
std::cin >> dimensions[dimension_idx];
std::cout << std::endl;
}
// now create the multi-dimensional array with the previously collected informations
TextMatrix text_matrix( dimensions );
std::cout << "Text matrix with " << DIMENSION_COUNT << " dimensions of size ";
display_position( dimensions );
std::cout << " have been created."<< std::endl;
std::cout << std::endl;
std::cout << "Ready!" << std::endl;
std::cout << "Type 'help' for the command list." << std::endl;
std::cin.sync();
// we can now play with it as long as we want
bool wants_to_exit = false;
while( !wants_to_exit )
{
std::cout << std::endl << ">" ;
std::tr1::array< char, 256 > entry_buffer;
std::cin.getline(entry_buffer.data(), entry_buffer.size());
const std::string entry( entry_buffer.data() );
wants_to_exit = process_command( entry, text_matrix );
}
return 0;
}
And you can see that to accede an element in the array, it's really easy : you just use the operator() as in the following functions :
void write_in_text_matrix( TextMatrix& text_matrix, const Position& position, const std::string& text )
{
text_matrix( position ) = text;
std::cout << "Text \"" << text << "\" written at position ";
display_position( position );
std::cout << std::endl;
}
void read_from_text_matrix( const TextMatrix& text_matrix, const Position& position )
{
const std::string& text = text_matrix( position );
std::cout << "Text at ";
display_position(position);
std::cout << " : "<< std::endl;
std::cout << " \"" << text << "\"" << std::endl;
}
Note : I compiled this application in VC9 + SP1 - got just some forgettable warnings.
There are two ways to represent a 2-dimension array in C++. One being more flexible than the other.
Array of arrays
First make an array of pointers, then initialize each pointer with another array.
// First dimension
int** array = new int*[3];
for( int i = 0; i < 3; ++i )
{
// Second dimension
array[i] = new int[4];
}
// You can then access your array data with
for( int i = 0; i < 3; ++i )
{
for( int j = 0; j < 4; ++j )
{
std::cout << array[i][j];
}
}
THe problem with this method is that your second dimension is allocated as many arrays, so does not ease the work of the memory allocator. Your memory is likely to be fragmented resulting in poorer performance. It provides more flexibility though since each array in the second dimension could have a different size.
Big array to hold all values
The trick here is to create a massive array to hold every data you need. The hard part is that you still need the first array of pointers if you want to be able to access the data using the array[i][j] syntax.
int* buffer = new int[3*4];
int** array = new int*[3];
for( int i = 0; i < 3; ++i )
{
array[i] = array + i * 4;
}
The int* array is not mandatory as you could access your data directly in buffer by computing the index in the buffer from the 2-dimension coordinates of the value.
// You can then access your array data with
for( int i = 0; i < 3; ++i )
{
for( int j = 0; j < 4; ++j )
{
const int index = i * 4 + j;
std::cout << buffer[index];
}
}
The RULE to keep in mind
Computer memory is linear and will still be for a long time. Keep in mind that 2-dimension arrays are not natively supported on a computer so the only way is to "linearize" the array into a 1-dimension array.
You can alloc rowscolssizeof(int) and access it by table[row*cols+col].
Here is the easy way to do this in C:
void manipulate(int rows, int cols, int (*data)[cols]) {
for(int i=0; i < rows; i++) {
for(int j=0; j < cols; j++) {
printf("%d ", data[i][j]);
}
printf("\n");
}
}
int main() {
int rows = ...;
int cols = ...;
int (*data)[cols] = malloc(rows*sizeof(*data));
manipulate(rows, cols, data);
free(data);
}
This is perfectly valid since C99, however it is not C++ of any standard: C++ requires the sizes of array types to be compile times constants. In that respect, C++ is now fifteen years behind C. And this situation is not going to change any time soon (the variable length array proposal for C++17 does not come close to the functionality of C99 variable length arrays).
The standard way without using boost is to use std::vector :
std::vector< std::vector<int> > v;
v.resize(rows, std::vector<int>(cols, 42)); // init value is 42
v[row][col] = ...;
That will take care of new / delete the memory you need automatically. But it's rather slow, since std::vector is not primarily designed for using it like that (nesting std::vector into each other). For example, all the memory is not allocated in one block, but separate for each column. Also the rows don't have to be all of the same width. Faster is using a normal vector, and then doing index calculation like col_count * row + col to get at a certain row and col:
std::vector<int> v(col_count * row_count, 42);
v[col_count * row + col) = ...;
But this will loose the capability to index the vector using [x][y]. You also have to store the amount of rows and cols somewhere, while using the nested solution you can get the amount of rows using v.size() and the amount of cols using v[0].size().
Using boost, you can use boost::multi_array, which does exactly what you want (see the other answer).
There is also the raw way using native C++ arrays. This envolves quite some work and is in no way better than the nested vector solution:
int ** rows = new int*[row_count];
for(std::size_t i = 0; i < row_count; i++) {
rows[i] = new int[cols_count];
std::fill(rows[i], rows[i] + cols_count, 42);
}
// use it... rows[row][col] then free it...
for(std::size_t i = 0; i < row_count; i++) {
delete[] rows[i];
}
delete[] rows;
You have to store the amount of columns and rows you created somewhere since you can't receive them from the pointer.
2D C-style arrays in C and C++ are a block of memory of size rows * columns * sizeof(datatype) bytes.
The actual [row][column] dimensions exist only statically at compile time. There's nothing there dynamically at runtime!
So, as others have mentioned, you can implement
int array [ rows ] [ columns ];
As:
int array [ rows * columns ]
Or as:
int * array = malloc ( rows * columns * sizeof(int) );
Next: Declaring a variably sized array. In C this is possible:
int main( int argc, char ** argv )
{
assert( argc > 2 );
int rows = atoi( argv[1] );
int columns = atoi( argv[2] );
assert(rows > 0 && columns > 0);
int data [ rows ] [ columns ]; // Yes, legal!
memset( &data, 0, sizeof(data) );
print( rows, columns, data );
manipulate( rows, columns, data );
print( rows, columns, data );
}
In C you can just pass the variably-sized array around the same as a non-variably-sized array:
void manipulate( int theRows, int theColumns, int theData[theRows][theColumns] )
{
for ( int r = 0; r < theRows; r ++ )
for ( int c = 0; c < theColumns; c ++ )
theData[r][c] = r*10 + c;
}
However, in C++ that is not possible. You need to allocate the array using dynamic allocation, e.g.:
int *array = new int[rows * cols]();
or preferably (with automated memory management)
std::vector<int> array(rows * cols);
Then the functions must be modified to accept 1-dimensional data:
void manipulate( int theRows, int theColumns, int *theData )
{
for ( int r = 0; r < theRows; r ++ )
for ( int c = 0; c < theColumns; c ++ )
theData[r * theColumns + c] = r*10 + c;
}
If you're using C instead of C++ you might want to look at the Array_T abstraction in Dave Hanson's library C Interfaces and Implementations. It's exceptionally clean and well designed. I have my students do a two-dimensional version as an exercise. You could do that or simply write an additional function that does an index mapping, e.g.,
void *Array_get_2d(Array_T a, int width, int height, int i, int j) {
return Array_get(a, j * width, i, j);
}
It is a bit cleaner to have a separate structure where you store the width, the height, and a pointer to the elements.
I recently came across a similar problem. I did not have Boost available. Vectors of vectors turned out to be pretty slow in comparison to plain arrays. Having an array of pointers makes the initialization a lot more laborious, because you have to iterate through every dimension and initialize the pointers, possibly having some pretty unwieldy, cascaded types in the process, possibly with lots of typedefs.
DISCLAIMER: I was not sure if I should post this as an answer, because it only answers part of your question. My apologies for the following:
I did not cover how to read the dimensions from standard input, as other commentators had remarked.
This is primarily for C++.
I have only coded this solution for two dimensions.
I decided to post this anyway, because I see vectors of vectors brought up frequently in reply to questions about multi-dimensional arrays in C++, without anyone mentioning the performance aspects of it (if you care about it).
I also interpreted the core issue of this question to be about how to get dynamic multi-dimensional arrays that can be used with the same ease as the Java example from the question, i.e. without the hassle of having to calculate the indices with a pseudo-multi-dimensional one-dimensional array.
I didn't see compiler extensions mentioned in the other answers, like the ones provided by GCC/G++ to declare multi-dimensional arrays with dynamic bounds the same way you do with static bounds. From what I understand, the question does not restrict the answers to standard C/C++. ISO C99 apparently does support them, but in C++ and prior versions of C they appear to be compiler-specific extensions. See this question: Dynamic arrays in C without malloc?
I came up with a way that people might like for C++, because it's little code, has the ease of use of the built-in static multi-dimensional arrays, and is just as fast.
template <typename T>
class Array2D {
private:
std::unique_ptr<T> managed_array_;
T* array_;
size_t x_, y_;
public:
Array2D(size_t x, size_t y) {
managed_array_.reset(new T[x * y]);
array_ = managed_array_.get();
y_ = y;
}
T* operator[](size_t x) const {
return &array_[x * y_];
}
};
You can use it like this. The dimensions do not
auto a = Array2D<int>(x, y);
a[xi][yi] = 42;
You can add an assertion, at least to all but the last dimension and extend the idea to to more than two dimensions. I have made a post on my blog about alternative ways to get multi-dimensional arrays. I am also much more specific on the relative performance and coding effort there.
Performance of Dynamic Multi-Dimensional Arrays in C++
You could use malloc to accomplish this and still have it accessible through normal array[][] mean, verses the array[rows * cols + cols] method.
main()
{
int i;
int rows;
int cols;
int **array = NULL;
array = malloc(sizeof(int*) * rows);
if (array == NULL)
return 0; // check for malloc fail
for (i = 0; i < rows; i++)
{
array[i] = malloc(sizeof(int) * cols)
if (array[i] == NULL)
return 0; // check for malloc fail
}
// and now you have a dynamically sized array
}
There is no way to determine the length of a given array in C++. The best way would probably be to pass in the length of each dimension of the array, and use that instead of the .length property of the array itself.