C++ Arduino passing char* to an array of char* - c++

I am having a problem with passing a char* to an array of char** on my Teensy.
Below is the problematic part:
for (j = 0; j < rulesamountsingle; j++) {
emptybuffer(buff);
char temp[10];
while(!Serial.available());
len = Serial.available();
for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
temp[i] = Serial.read();
}
temp[len-1] = 0;
fuzzyRulesSingle[j] = temp;
Serial.print(fuzzyRulesSingle[j]);
Serial.print('\n');
}
As you can see, fuzzyRulesSingle[j] (where fuzzyRulesSingle is a char**) will be filled by the variable temp (a char*). As I increment j, the next address in fuzzyRulesSingle will be filled by a new temp.
However, when I print my fuzzyRulesSingle OUTSIDE the code above, all fuzzyRulesSingle will be filled with the last value of temp.
Where have I gone wrong?

You are pointing fuzzyRulesSingle[j] to the temporary char array temp.
A simple way to fix this is to change the fuzzyRulesSingle[j] = temp; to strcpy(fuzzyRulesSingle[j], temp) and changing the declaration of fuzzzyRulessSingle to the size required.
OR
you can declare temp outsize the loop and use malloc to allocate memory necessary and then assign it to fuzzyRulesSingle[j]

Related

Memory allocation with looping in C++

I have a List class for char arrays. And I want to push back N arrays from 'a' to 'a..a'.
char* x;
SList list;
for (unsigned int i = 1; i < n+1; i++) {
x = new char[i+1];
for (unsigned int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
x[j] = 'a';
}
x[i] = '\0';
list.push_back(&x);
}
But every time, x has the same address. And in result, my List object contains N pointers to the same address.
Is there a way to push back these arrays in loop with correct memory allocation?
Before asking found this question, but it doesn't provide a cool solution for my problem.
In each iteration of the loop x = new char[i+1]; returns a different address, which is stored in x. So the value of x changes in each iteration, yet, the address of x doesn't.
Did you mean
list.push_back(x);
to add the address of the newly allocated memory? Of course this would require you to change the type of list the a collection of char *.
It must be mentioned that dereferencing &x after x goes out of scope will lead to undefined behaviour, because x doesn't exist anymore. You fill list with dangling pointers.
Finally I'd like to mention that you could avoid the nasty manual memory management and simply use a std::vector<std::string>.
std::vector<std::string> list;
for (unsigned int i = 1; i < n+1; i++) {
std::string newString(i, 'a'); // string with i times 'a'
list.push_back(newString);
}
Ok. I found a pretty straightforward solution:
char** x = new char*[n];
SList sl;
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
x[i] = new char[i+1];
for (unsigned int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
x[i][j] = 'a';
}
x[i][i] = '\0';
sl.push_back(&x[i]);
}
With having N addresses to store pointers to arrays. I can just add their addresses to my list object

The array in my singleton isn't keeping information after leaving a function and then it crashes when it tries to access the information again

I have an array called int **grid that is set up in Amazon::initGrid() and is made to be a [16][16] grid with new. I set every array value to 0 and then set [2][2] to 32. Now when I leave initGrid() and come back in getGrid() it has lost its value and is now 0x0000.
I don't know what to try, the solution seems to be really simple, but I'm just not getting it. Somehow the data isn't being kept in g_amazon but I could post the code.
// Returns a pointer to grid
int** Amazon::getGridVal()
{
char buf[100];
sprintf_s(buf, "Hello %d\n", grid[2][2]);
return grid;
}
int Amazon::initGrid()
{
int** grid = 0;
grid = new int* [16];
for (int i = 0; i < 16; i++)
{
grid[i] = new int[16];
for (int j = 0; j < 16; j++)
{
grid[i][j] = 0;
}
}
grid[2][2] = 32;
return 0;
}
int **grid;
g_amazon = Amazon::getInstance();
g_amazon->initGrid();
grid = g_amazon->getGridVal();
for (int i = 0; i < 16; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < 16; j++)
{
int index;
index = (width * 4 * i) + (4 * j);
int gridval;
gridval = grid[i][j];
lpBits[index] = gridval;
lpBits[index + 1] = gridval;
lpBits[index + 2] = gridval;
}
}
It crashes when I run it at the line where sprintf_s prints out [2][2] and it also crashes when I get to gridval = grid[i][j] because it's at memory location 0x000000.
The variable
int** grid
in the initGrid() function is a local variable. Edit** When the function returns the variable is popped off the stack. However, since it was declared with the new operator the memory still exists on the heap; it is simply just not pointed to by your global grid variable.
#Dean said in comment:
I have grid as an int** grid; in class Amazon {}; so shouldn't it stay in memory or do I need a static var.
That is the problem:
local int **grid; on Amazon::initGrid::
is masking
member int **grid; on Amazon::
as the first context has higher priority in name lookup.
So initGrid() allocates memory referenced only by a local pointer. That pointer no longer exists when you return from this function, Amazon::grid was never touched on initialization and you're also left with some bad memory issues.
So, as commented by #Remy-Lebeau, I also suggest
Consider using std::vector> or std::array, 16> instead. There is no good reason to use new[] manually in this situation.

Generate random char/digit

I`m trying to found fastest way to generate random digit/char array.
char *randomGet(int num) {
srand(time(NULL));
const char ab[37] = { "0123456789ABCDEFGHIGKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ" };//Alphabet&Digit
char *targ = new char[num];
for (int i = 0; i < num; i++) {
strcat(targ, ab[rand() % 38]);
}
return targ;
}
So far I've come up with this, but it does not work (argument of type char is incompatible with parameter of type const char *).
Help me find the best solution to my problem. Ty.
strcat() takes a char* as input, but you are giving it a single char instead, thus the compiler error.
Also, the buffer that strcat() writes to must be null terminated, but your targ buffer is not null terminated initially, and you are not allocating enough space for a final null terminator anyway.
You don't need to use strcat() at all. Since you are looping anyway, just use the loop counter as the index where to write in the buffer:
Also, you are using the wrong integer value when modulo the return value of rand(). You are producing a random index that may go out of bounds of your ab[] array.
Try this instead:
char *randomGet(int num)
{
srand(time(NULL));
static const char ab[] = "0123456789ABCDEFGHIGKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ"; //Alphabet&Digit
char *targ = new char[num+1];
for (int i = 0; i < num; ++i) {
targ[i] = ab[rand() % 36];
}
targ[num] = '\0';
return targ;
}
I'd make two changes. First, make the internal source array static:
static const char ab[] = "0123456789ABCDEFGHIGKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ";
Note that this version does not specify the array size; the compiler will figure it out from the initializer.
Second, pass in a pointer to the target array:
void randomGet(char* targ, int num) {
static const char ab[] = "0123456789ABCDEFGHIGKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ";
for (int i = 0; i < num - 1; ++i)
targ[i] = ab[rand() % (sizeof ab - 1)];
targ[num - 1] = '\0';
}
This way, the caller decides how to allocate memory for the string.

How to make pointers to chars in the second array

I have an array of chars. n is array's length
char tab[n];
cin.get(tab, n);
cout<<tab<<"\0"<<endl;
then I create second array
char* t = new char[n];
for(int i = 0; tab[i] != '\0'; i++){
t[i] = tab[i];
}
I would like to have pointers to corresponding element. I mean t[2] contains addres of tab[2]. Then I would like to sort array t so tab stays as it was and only t shuffles but when I make change in the array t for example
t[2] = 'a';
I loose t[3]t[4]....
EDIT:
do{
for(int i = 0; i < n -1; i++){
if(t[i] > t[i+1]){
char* x = &t[i];
t[i] = t[i+1];
t[i+1] = *x
}
n--;
}
}while(n>1);
I would like to have pointers to corresponding element. I mean t2 contains addres of tab2.
So try this:
char** t = new (char*)[n];
for(int i = 0; tab[i] != '\0'; i++){
t[i] = tab+i; // or `&(tab[i])`
To sort the t array based on tab values, use *t[i] to access character values stored in location i of the t array.
See here and here for good tutorials about C pointers.

Transfer an array of char via pointer to another temp array pointer

I'm learning to use pointer to copy char array.
I have the following code in C++. What I'm trying to do is to transfer and array (set1) using pointer to another pointer array (temp).
But when I try to print out (temp), it is not the same as (set1).
Transfer an array via pointer to another temp array pointer.
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdlib>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
char set1[] = "ABC";
char* p = &set1[0];
int tempSize = 0;
char* temp = new char[256];
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
{
*temp = *p;
cout << *temp; // ABC
++temp;
++tempSize;
++p;
}
cout << "\n";
for (int i = 0; i < tempSize; i++)
{
cout << temp[i]; // Why ABC is not printed?
}
delete [] temp;
return 0;
}
// Why ABC is not printed?
Because your pointer is travelling in undefined behavior region:
char* temp = new char[256];
...
++temp; // gone !!
On top of that,
you are not terminating the string with \0 in the end (may not be needed in your code)
delete[]ing this corrupt pointer in the end.
Since you are writing for learning purpose, I would suggest simple fix to your code:
char* const temp = new char[256];
^^^^^ ensures `temp` is not modifiable
Now use temp[i] for traversing purpose.
It's because in the loop copying the array, you change temp. After the loop, it points to one beyond the copied data.
Also, you forget to terminate the new allocated array. You should add the character '\0' at the end.
The problem is this line:
++temp;
You are incrementing the pointer and then write to it. In the end temp[i]; does not point to the beginning of your string, but to the end.
The easiest way to do this is to remove the first for loop with:
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
{
temp[i] = set1[i];
}
temp[4] = '\0'; // don't forget to close the string
C-style strings have a null terminator - "ABC" contains four characters. Also, I'm not at all sure that the delete call on temp is valid - you have been incrementing it since it was 'newed'.