I have an array of sockets (pfd[nfd].fd). I also have an array of pointers (event_tracking* track[10]). If there comes a point in my code where I try and receive data from a socket that is closed I would like to remove that array element in both arrays and then shift the arrays to fill the empty spot.
for(j=1; j<nfd; j++) {
if(pfd[j].revents&POLLIN) {
char* p = track.receive_datagram();
if (p == 0) {
delete track[j-1];
//Delete element in pfd[nfd].fd
//Reorder elements of track array
//Reorder elements of pfd array
}
}
}
I know you can call the delete operator to call the destructor for track but I'm not sure how to reorder the elements in the array now that one is missing? Or how to delete and reorder the pfd array?
Any help would be appreciated! I can't find any examples of deleting and reordering arrays in my text.
A C++ solution should be to use a std::vector or std::array and forget about everything (possibly storing smart pointers, eg std::unique_ptr<T>).
If you really want to go the hard way you could setup things like these:
find element to remove (index i)
if i == LENGTH_OF_ARRAY - 1 do nothing, otherwise swap element at i and at LENGTH_OF_ARRAY - 1 so that the element to be removed is in last position
call delete array[LENGTH_OF_ARRAY - 1] to destroy last element
call array = realloc(array, (LENGTH_OF_ARRAY - 1) * sizeof(array[0])) to release memory in the array for removed element, and update LENGTH_OF_ARRAY
Without changing your data structures, the solution is to copy each element after the one you remove over the previous element of the array. This is more efficient for a linked list. With an array allocated by new[], you would not reallocate anything, but you could resize a vector.
Related
A classic, I'm looking for optimisation here : I have an array of things, and after some processing I know I'm only interested in elements i to j. How to trim my array in the fatset, lightest way, with complete deletions/freeing of memory of elements before i and after j ?
I'm doing mebedded C++, so I may not be able to compile all sorts of library let's say. But std or vector things welcome in a first phase !
I've tried, for array A to be trimmed between i and j, with variable numElms telling me the number of elements in A :
A = &A[i];
numElms = i-j+1;
As it is this yields an incompatibility error. Can that be fixed, and even when fixed, does that free the memory at all for now-unused elements?
A little context : This array is the central data set of my module, and it can be heavy. It will live as long as the module lives. And there's no need to carry dead weight all this time. This is the very first thing that is done - figuring which segment of the data set has to be at all analyzed, and trimming and dumping the rest forever, never to use it again (until the next cycle where we get a fresh array with possibily a compeltely different size).
When asking questions about speed your millage may very based on the size of the array you're working with, but:
Your fastest way will be to not trim the array, just use A[index + i] to find the elements you want.
The lightest way to do this would be to:
Allocate a dynamic array with malloc
Once i and j are found copy that range to the head of the dynamic array
Use realloc to resize the dynamic array to the size j - i + 1
However you have this tagged as C++ not C, so I believe that you're also interested in readability and the required programming investment, not raw speed or weight. If this is true then I would suggest use of a vector or deque.
Given vector<thing> A or a deque<thing> A you could do:
A.erase(cbegin(A), next(cbegin(A), i));
A.resize(j - i + 1);
There is no way to change aloocated memory block size in standard C++ (unless you have POD data — in this case C facilities like realloc could be used). The only way to trim an array is to allocate new array. copy/move needed elements and destroy old array.
You can do it manually, or using vectors:
int* array = new int[10]{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
std::vector<int> vec {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
//We want only elements 3-5
{
int* new_array = new int[3];
std::copy(array + 3, array + 6, new_array);
delete[] array;
array = new_array;
}
vec = std::vector<int>(vec.begin()+3, vec.begin()+6);
If you are using C++11, both approaches should have same perfomance.
If you only want to remove extra elements and do not really want to release memory (for example you might want to add more elements later) you can follow NathanOliver link
However, you should consider: do you really need that memory freed immideately? Do you need to move elements right now? Will you array live for such long time that this memory would be lost for your program completely? Maybe you need a range or perharps a view to the array content? In many cases you can store two pointers (or pointer and size) to denote your "new" array, while keeping old one to be released all at once.
Title says it all more or less. When I need an (for the sake of this example) integer array for an unknown amount of values I know I can change it's size using new *array = new int[size]. Now my question is: If I have an array of a certain size, but I need to make it bigger, can I just use the new operator to expand it and will it still have all previously stored elements or would it be smarter to create a whole new array with a dynamic size, copy all elements from the previous array into the new one and delete[] the old array. Basically just swapping between the two arrays, whenever I need a new size.
Specifically I am asking whether or not this piece of code would work in the way it's intended to work
for(int i = 1; i < 10; i++){
int *array = new int[i];
array[i-1] = i;
}
My assumption is that this array will first be the size of 1 and store the value 1 at index 0. Then it will reallocate its size to 2 and store the value to at index 1 and so on until i is 9.
I guess to rephrase my question a bit better: Does an array initialized with new have to be populated with elements or will it copy the elements it had from before using the operator?
You can't resize the array in this way. You need to make a new array and then copy the old array into it. You can also try std::vector, which does what you want automatically.
If you want to use pointers rather than std::vector to change the size of your array, you can do it in this way.
int n = 100; // This will be the number of elements.
int *array1; // Pointer
array1 = new int[n]; // This will allocate your array with size n, so you will have 100 elements. You can combine this with the previous in int *array1 = new int[n];
So fill up the this array however you please...
Then you decide you want a 200 element array instead? You will need to create a different array in the same way.
int *array2 = new int[200];
You can use the for loop to copy array 1 into array 2. The for loop should iterate as many times as there are elements in array 1 (100).
for(int i = 0; i < 100; ++i)
array2[i] = array[1];
At this stage array2 is exactly the same as array1, but with 100 uninitialized elements at your disposal from [100] to [199].
You won't need array1 anymore, so at some point, you should call
delete [] array1;
Your assumption, by the way would not work, because on the first cycle of your loop, you create (or try to create) an array of i=1 element. Arrays start counting at 0, so your only single element is [0]. When i is at 0, what is i-1?
If you try to access array[-1], you'll probably crash. But why should you want to create 10 different arrays? new keyword creates an unrelated object, not overwrites the one with the same name.
Does an array initialized with new have to be populated with elements or will it copy the elements it had from before using the operator?
new[] allocates new array, completely independent from previous.
I know 3 ways to "make the array bigger":
As #ravi mentioned, don't mess with poinsters, use modern std::vector.
Make new array in new pointer, std::move elements from old array to the new one, and then delete[] old array.
Get rid of new[] & delete[], use old realloc with malloc & free.
You have to allocate new array and copy old array's data into that. This is how vector is implemented. Had there been better way of doing it, C++ standard community would have considered that.
I am a bit confused here, suppose i am making a container that will hold some elements and those elements can be removed.
I would have a fixed array of elements for that.
Now my question is with allocating and deallocating that array and deallocatisingle elements in it.
1) Allocating
Item* data;
Container()
{
data = new Item[size];
}
Then to add I do something like that:
add(Item it)
{
data[empty++] = it;
}
Now my question is with that allocation I have created size objects of Items then when I come in the add I add another item above, so does this means there is destruction of the old and the new take over?
Should I better use allocater<T> and uninitializedfill() as I read it allocate required memory without constructing the object.
2) Deallocating:
Here comes all the confusion really , on removing a single element can I use that?
remove(Item it)
{
//index is item index
delete data[index];
//restore contiguity to array
empty--;
}
can I use delete data[index] even if Item isn't a pointer? if not how then could I do this part?!
If I can then, what if Item was a pointer so when I delete it does it deletes the object pointed by it?
When you allocate a fixed-length array with
data = new Item[size];
you have allocated all size elements of the array at once, in a contiguous block of memory. You do not allocate individual elements in the array, and you cannot deallocate individual elements with delete data[index] -- you can only deallocate the entire array with delete[] data when you are done.
If you anticipate needing to add and remove elements at the end of the array, I recommend using std::vector instead. If you expect to add and remove elements anywhere in the array, std::list probably makes more sense.
data = new Item[size];
This creates an array of Items of size length, and return a poitner to them. Those itemswill be in indexes 0..(size-1) inclusive.
data[empty++] = it;
Assuming empty is < size, this will bash one of your items over the head, repalcing it with the Item passed into add(). If empty >= size than bad things will happen.
delete data[index];
This is not legal code. You are stuck with all (size) Items until you want to delete the lot.
Use:
std::vector<Item> data(N);
You have to decide if Items are values or referred objects. In fact allocation and deallocation look incoherent:
new Item[size] actually creates size Items (that start to exist all together) and data[i] = item copies the lone item intio the ith Item addressed by data (replacing its internal value). In this way you are not "inserting" anything. the empty index (what a bad name...) just defines what to replace.
delete data[index] cannot work, because data[index] is not a pointer (its an Item itself).
The pair with data = new Item[x] is delete[] data that deletes all them together as together thay have been created.
Inserting and removing an item inside a block of Items of a given predefined size is ... nonsense (if you can do the the size is not predefined).
You have to consider reallocating the array, copy, and shifting elements. But this is nothing more than re-implementing std::vector.
i have a project in c++03 that have a problem with data structure: i use vector instead of list even if i have to continuously pop_front-push_back. but for now it is ok because i need to rewrite too many code for now.
my approach is tuo have a buffer of last frame_size point always updated. so each frame i have to pop front and push back. (mayebe there is a name for this approach?)
so i use this code:
Point apoint; // allocate new point
apoint.x = xx;
apoint.y = yy;
int size = points.size()
if (size > frame_size) {
this->points.erase( points.begin() ); // pop_front
}
this->points.push_back(apoint);
i have some ready-to-use code for an object pool and so i thought: it is not a great optimization but i can store the front in the pool and so i can gain the allocation time of apoint.
ok this is not so useful and probably it make no sense but i ask just to educational curiosity: how can i do that?
how can i store the memory of erased element of a vector for reusing it? does this question make sense? if not, why?
.. because erase does not return the erased vector, it return:
A random access iterator pointing to the new location of the element
that followed the last element erased by the function call, which is
the vector end if the operation erased the last element in the
sequence.
i have some ready-to-use code for an object pool ... how can i do that?
Using a vector, you can't. A vector stores its elements in a contiguous array, so they can't be allocated one at a time, only in blocks of arbitrary size. Therefore, you can't use an object pool as an allocator for std::vector.
how can i store the memory of erased element of a vector for reusing it? does this question make sense? if not, why?
The vector already does that. Your call to erase moves all the elements down into the space vacated by the first element, leaving an empty space at the end to push the new element into.
As long as you use a vector, you can't avoid moving all the elements when you erase the first; if that is too inefficient, then use a deque (or possibly a list) instead.
I'm not sure to understand what you want to do, but this should be functionnally equivalent to what you wrote, without constructing a temporary Point instance:
// don't do this on an empty vector
assert (points.size() > 0);
// rotate elements in the vector, erasing the first element
// and duplicating the last one
copy (points.begin()+1, points.end(), points.begin());
// overwrite the last element with your new data
points.back().x = xx;
points.back().y = yy;
EDIT: As Mike Seymour noted in the comments, neither this solution nor the approach proposed in the question cause any new memory allocation.
I have a dynamically allocated array :
myRectangle lastRectanglesArray = new myRectangle[lastMaxLabel];
I would like to loop through all elements in this array and remove these that will meet my condition (e.g. too big rectangle).
I have been thinking that I can loop through this array and get the number of elements that would satisfy my condition and then allocate a new array. But how can I 'transfer' these 'wanted' elements into my new array ?
Just for the record: I cannot use STL containers.
myRectangle * lastRectanglesArray = new myRectangle[lastMaxLabel];
// initialize the entries in the lastRectanglesArray
// create a temporary array which contains info about each individual
// entry. namely, it only holds info about whether the entry should
// be kept, or deleted.
// we also use the 'entries' value, which is the number of entries
// in the new array
bool * entriesToKeep = new bool[lastMaxLabel];
int entries = 0;
// check each entry, and mark whether it should be kept or deleted
for (int i = 0; i != lastMaxLabel; ++i) {
// check whether the entry should be kept or deleted...
// here, i just put a function with signature like:
// bool shouldKeepRectangle(const myRectangle &);
entriesToKeep[i] = shouldKeepRectangle(lastRectanglesArray[i]);
if (entriesToKeep[i]) ++entries;
}
// create a new array that will contain the entries that should be kept
myRectangle * rectanglesArray = new myRectangle[entries];
// assign the entries in the new array
for (int i = 0, j = 0; i != lastMaxLabel && j != entries; ++i) {
if (entriesToKeep[i])
rectanglesArray[j++] = lastRectanglesArray[i];
}
// free the memory held by the temp array
delete [] entriesToKeep;
// if the old array is not needed anymore, delete it
delete [] lastRectanglesArray;
// and here you have rectanglesArray, a brand new array that contains
// only the elements that you need.
Just move the next array location over the one that needs to be deleted, and shift everything over til the end of the array.
Yours look like the perfect case for using a Linked List. You would however have to do away with the new myRectangle[lastMaxLabel] part as you would have to implement it as pert of your Insert() function.
This way you would not require to transfer the wanted elements into a new array, but just delete the unwanted element.
Any more light on your use-case would help us to think of better alternatives.
I agree with Michael Chinen - use std::vector instead. You'll avoid lots of other potential problems this way. If you really want to use dynamic arrays, see this question: Remove an array element and shift the remaining ones
if you have a big amount of data in array that will be a problem for shifting using loop
maybe you should build your own array management class (find,add,deleteAt,etc).
my suggestion use link list node method.. it will be faster rather then you use loop for shifting.