I often need to create a 2D array with width and height (let them be n and m) unknown at compile time, usually I write :
vector<int> arr(n * m);
And I access elements manually with :
arr[j * m + i]
I recently got told that I could instead write :
int arr[n][m] // n and m still only known at runtime.
So here are 2 questions :
Is this behaviour allowed by the C++ Standard ?
How should I pass such an array to a function ? g++ reports that arr has type int (*)[n], but again, n is dynamic and not known outside the function where it is declared (main).
The feature you are asking about (where the dimensions are only made known at runtime) is a non-standard extension of C++, but a standard one of C.99 (made into an optional feature in C.11). The feature is called variable-length array (VLA), and the link is the documentation for GCC.
If you are using GCC, then you are to pass the length of the array as a parameter to the function.
void foo (int m, int arr[][m]) {
//...
}
However, there seems to be a bug in either the compiler or the documentation, as the above function prototype syntax only works when compiling C code, not C++ (as of gcc version 4.8.2). The only work-around I found was to use a void * parameter, and cast it int the function body:
int foo_workaround (int m, void *x)
{
int (*arr)[m] = static_cast<int (*)[m]>(x);
//...
}
There are other solutions if you do not want to rely on a compiler extension. If you don't mind a separate allocation for each row, you can use a vector of vectors, for example:
std::vector<std::vector<int> > arr(n, std::vector<int>(m));
However, if you want a single allocation block like you demonstrated in your own example, then it is better to create a wrapper class around vector to give you 2-d like syntax.
template <typename T>
class vector2d {
int n_;
int m_;
std::vector<T> vec_;
template <typename I>
class vector2d_ref {
typedef std::iterator_traits<I> TRAITS;
typedef typename TRAITS::value_type R_TYPE;
template <typename> friend class vector2d;
I p_;
vector2d_ref (I p) : p_(p) {}
public:
R_TYPE & operator [] (int j) { return *(p_+j); }
};
typedef std::vector<T> VEC;
typedef vector2d_ref<typename VEC::iterator> REF;
typedef vector2d_ref<typename VEC::const_iterator> CREF;
template <typename I>
vector2d_ref<I> ref (I p, int i) { return p + (i * m_); }
public:
vector2d (int n, int m) : n_(n), m_(m), vec_(n*m) {}
REF operator [] (int i) { return ref(vec_.begin(), i); }
CREF operator [] (int i) const { return ref(vec_.begin(), i); }
};
The wrapper's operator[] returns an intermediate object that also overloads operator[] to allow 2-dimensional array syntax when using the wrapper.
vector2d<int> v(n, m);
v[i][j] = 7;
std::cout << v[i][j] << '\n';
Why not have an std::vector of std::vector's?
std::vector<std::vector<int> > arr(n, std::vector<int>(m));
Accessing an item then becomes:
std::cout << "(2,1) = " << arr[2][1] << std::endl;
A std::vector of std::vector's (from #include <vector>) would do the same thing as a 2-Dimensional array:
int n = 10, m = 10; //vector dimensions
std::vector<std::vector<int>> arr(n, std::vector<int>(m)); //Create 2D vector (vector will be stored as "std::vector<int> arr(n * m);
//you can get values from 2D vector the same way that you can for arrays
int a = 5, b = 5, value = 12345;
arr[a][b] = 12345;
std::cout << "The element at position (" << a << ", " << b << ") is " << arr[a][b] << "." << std::endl;
outputs:
The element at position (5, 5) is 12345.
Related
I have created a class matrix that besides having some member functions, operators and a constructor has two variables:
int m, which is the dimension (side length) of the quadratic matrix
double a[], which contains the elements of the matrix.
As long as I only create one matrix object A all seem to work fine and all my member operators and functions work as they should.
My problem is that once I create a second object B of the class matrix the variables of object A changes as well.
The relevant code is as follows:
class Matrix{
private:
const int m;
double a[];
public:
Matrix(int inpm);
void fillMatrix(const double inpa[]);
};
Matrix::Matrix(int inpm): m(inpm){
a[impm*inpm];
}
void Matrix::fillmatrix(const double inpa[]){
for (int i ; i<m*m ; i++){
a[i]=inpa[i];
}
}
int min =2;
double ain[min*min] = {1,2,3,4};
double bin[min*min] = {5,6,7,8};
Matrix A(min);
Matrix B(min);
A.fillMatrix(ain);
//A looks precisely as it should here:
//m=2, a={1,2,3,4}
B.fillMatrix(bin);
//Here B looks as it should but A has changed to:
//m=0, a={7,8,3,4}
obviously the change to the first object occur when I run fillMatrix() for the second object but I cannot figure out why, especially since m is a constant integer.
I'm really stuck so grateful for all help.
PS: I use another member function "void printMatrix();" using std:cout to look at the values of m and all elements in a.
a[impm*inpm]; This does not do what you think. GCC even warns with statement has no effect.
a remains uninitialized here and you run into undefined behavior when you try to access a[i]
class Matrix{
private:
const int m;
double *a;
....
and
Matrix::Matrix(int inpm): m(inpm)
{
a = new double[inpm*inpm];
}
and then remember to delete
Matrix::~Matrix()
{
delete a;
}
c++ arrays are not actually allowed to variable. There are plenty of sources about why variable length arrays (vla's) are not allowed. If you wan't a dynamic length array with size chosen at run time, you need to allocate some memory:
double *a;
...
a = new double[inpm*inpm];
But this sucks! Now you have to remember to delete and access correctly and everything. You could wrap this memory in a class to control this, and since this is such a good idea, c++ provides this as standard. It is called std::vector. Your code will happily reduce to this:
class Matrix{
private:
const int m;
std::vector<double> a;
public:
Matrix(int inpm) : m(inpm), a(m * m) {}
The problem is because of your array declaration. people used to call that kind of array declaration as "flexible array declaration.". And it wouldn't work as you expected. plus there are certain rules to follow while using a flexible array.
But if you want to create a dynamic array you can use malloc to create array dynamically.
I've noticed a few issues with your code. The first few were already mentioned by others such as your member double a[]; This is uninitialized and C++ does not allow for variable length vectors. To resolve this there are two possible solutions which I'll discuss shortly. The other issue that others have mentioned is that in your Matrix::fillMatrix() function the variable in your for loop i is also uninitialized, so i can be anything and this will lead to undefined behavior.
A few issues that have not been mentioned by others are as follows:
In your constructor definition you are trying to initialize m with a[impm*inpm] I think this might be a typo on your part. Another one is you declare your function as ::fillMatrix() but you define it outside of the class declaration as ::fillmatrix(). Again I think this might be just a typo on your part.
As for the issue above with the use of arrays in C++ the easiest way to do this is what others have already stated and that is to use std::vector<type>.
The other way is to write a class that works similarly to std::vector but has the mechanics of a matrix. Your class would look something like this using templates: If you want a variable length container at runtime you have to know it's size at compile time using templates here can help as the template has to be deduced at compile time upon instantiation!
template<class T, unsigned N>
class Matrix {
private:
static const unsigned Stride = N;
static const unsigned Size = Stride * Stride;
T data[Size] = {};
public:
Matrix() {};
void fillMatrix( const T* dataIn );
void printMatrix();
};
template<class T, unsigned N>
void Matrix<T, N>::fillMatrix( const T* dataIn ) {
for( unsigned int i = 0; i < Size; i++ ) {
this->data[i] = dataIn[i];
}
}
template<class T, unsigned N>
void Matrix<T, N>::printMatrix() {
for( unsigned int i = 0; i < Stride; i++ ) {
for( unsigned int j = 0; j < Stride; j++ ) {
std::cout << this->data[i*Stride + j] << " ";
}
std::cout << '\n';
}
}
int main() {
// 2x2 = 4
double ain[4] = { 1,2,3,4 };
double bin[4] = { 5,6,7,8 };
Matrix<double, 2> A;
Matrix<double, 2> B;
A.fillMatrix( ain );
A.printMatrix();
std::cout << '\n';
B.fillMatrix( bin );
B.printMatrix();
std::cout << '\n';
// test A again
A.printMatrix();
std::cout << '\n';
B.printMatrix();
std::cout << '\n';
// Try it with other types
// 3x3 = 9
char data[9] = { 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g', 'h', 'i' };
Matrix<char, 3> C;
C.fillMatrix( data );
C.printMatrix();
std::cout << '\n';
return 0;
}
Output:
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
a b c
d e f
g h i
With this type of design using templates you are not restricted to just using a single type such as int, float etc. You can even use User Defined Types. The only thing here that you would need to consider is any kind of operators you may have. Also the way this class is written it will always create a MxM matrix which will always be a square matrix. If you need a non square matrix; you can just add to this class by adding in a 2nd unsigned constant value to the template parameter list and renaming them accordingly for MxN. Then just substitute where they belong in the math. It would look something like this:
template<class T, unsigned M, unsigned N>
class Matrix {
private:
static const unsigned Row = M;
static const unsigned Col = N;
static const unsigned Size = Row * Col;
T data[Size] = {};
};
Now how you label them might depend on if you want Row-Col major or Col-Row major...
I'm a high school student learning programming and I have a problem that I can't figure out how to solve.
I have an integer "x", and I want a matrix "mat" to have the size of "x":
int mat[x][x];
But that works only in main() where I've read x;
For example if x == 5, the equivalent would be
int mat[5][5];
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int x;
int mat[x][x];
void f(int mat2[x][x])
{
}
int main()
{
cin >> x;
int m[x][x];
f(m);
}
I've wrote this short program to show where it works and it doesn't work.
error: array bound is not an integer constant before ']' token
I've the error at the global declaration, at the declaration in function void f. It only compiles without errors in main();
What can I do to create a matrix with the size of x outside of the main function?
Variable length arrays aren't spported in standard c++. Besides you don't want the global definition.
What you can use portably in that case is std::vector:
void f(std::vector<std::vector<int>>& mat)
{
}
int main()
{
cin >> x;
std::vector<std::vector<int>> m(x,std::vector<int>(x));
f(m);
}
If you pass that vector around to functions or being allocated within functions, the size information will be kept at any time.
What can I do to create a matrix with the size of x outside of the main function?
Something like this:
std::vector<std::vector<int>> foo() {
cin >> x;
std::vector<std::vector<int>> m(x,std::vector<int>(x));
return m;
}
int main()
{
std::vector<std::vector<int>> mat = foo();
}
Handling of multi-dimension arrays in C++ is not easy. The best way to go is often to map a multi-dimensionnal indexing with a linear memory chunk.
For instance, for a 2 by 2 matrix, one can create an array of 2*2=4 elements and map it this way:
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| map[0][0] | map[0][1] | map[1][0] | map[1][1] |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
This seems overly complicated at first glance, but it simplifies greatly the memory allocation.
For an arbitrary sized matrix of width by height, map[i][j] is at index i*height + j. This can be translated in C++, encapsulated in a template class Matrix:
#include <array>
template <typename T, size_t WIDTH, size_t HEIGHT>
class Matrix {
std::array<T, WIDTH*HEIGHT> data;
public:
T& operator()(size_t i, size_t j) {
return data[i*HEIGHT + j];
}
const T& operator()(size_t i, size_t j) const {
return data[i*HEIGHT + j];
}
};
This has the disadvantage that the Matrix' dimensions must be known at compile time (and can be mitigated, see note (ii) at end of answer). But it makes its use so easy:
void fill(Matrix<int, 2, 2>& m) {
m(0,0) = 0;
m(0,1) = 1;
m(1,0) = 2;
m(1,1) = 3;
}
int main() {
Matrix<int, 2, 2> m;
fill(m);
std::cout << m(1,0) << "\n";
}
Note (i): Elements are indexed by (line, column) rather than [line][column] because we can't create an operator[] accepting multiple values.
Live on coliru
Note (ii): This basic idea can be enriched (demo) to handle resizable matrixes, with use of a std::vector instead of std::array and a proxy to std::vector::resize().
Variable-length array is supported by some compiler as an extension. The manual of the compiler provides more information.Gnu VLR
The storage duration of a variable-length array(if supported) generally can't be static, which is why you get the error message (global variables have static storage duration).
Unrelated: The major array bound of the parameter mat2 isn't necessary, i.e. void f(int mat2[x][x]) is equivalent to void f(int mat2[][x]).
C++ has no provision for dynamic 2D matrix but provides all you need to create complex classes. A (static) 2D array is a contiguously allocated array of height arrays of width elements. Just mimic that and:
allocate a linear array of width * height
provide an operator[](int) that returns a pointer to the first element of ith row
do necessary housekeeping in destructor and in a copy (and move if C++11 or above) constructor.
Example of code:
template <typename T>
class Matrix {
T *data;
int width;
int height;
public:
// direct ctor
Matrix(int h, int w): width(w), height(h) {
data = new T[w * h];
}
//copy ctor
Matrix(const Matrix& src): width(src.width), height(src.height) {
data = new T[width * height]; // allocate and copy data array
for (int i=0; i<width * height; i++) data[i] = src.data[i];
}
// move ctor
Matrix(Matrix&& src): width(src.width), height(src.height) {
data = src.data; // steal original array in a move
src.data = NULL; // ensure no deletion will occur at src destruction
}
~Matrix() {
delete data;
data = NULL;
}
// explicitely delete assignement operators
Matrix& operator = (const Matrix&) = delete;
Matrix& operator = (Matrix&&) = delete;
T* operator[](int i) {
//optionaly test 0 <= i < width
return &data[i * width];
}
};
int main()
{
int w;
std::cin >> x;
Matrix<int> m(x, x);
// you can then use m[i][j] as you would for a static 2D array
...
}
This class does not support any resizing by design. If you need that, you really should use a vector<vector<T> >. The downside is that it has no default ctor either, because the dimension must be given at definition time (even if we could easily imagine a 2 phases initialization...).
You can dynamic allocate memory to use, in the c/c++, it does not support dynamic size of static memory allocation, so, you just modify your code like this.
int x;
cin >>x;
int** mat = new int[x][x];
Background: I'm stuck to arm-arago-linux-gnueabi-g++ (GCC) 4.3.3. Although answers that requires C++11 or later is also appreciated, please explicitly express any language requirement later than C++03.
The object's constructor fills values into tables to be used by the algorithm.
As those table does not change and are not supposed to be changed, I want the them to be const, how do I do that?
Difficulty #1, the values are computationally generated, and I don't want to hard code them in a source file.
Difficulty #2, the computing sometimes depends on inputs that are only available at runtime.
Difficulty #3, I don't know why but I don't want the array to be static, even though the values might be the same for all objects(cases where the values does not depend on runtime input).
Difficulty #4, it's an array, so initializer list in C++03 won't work.
Edit1:
A few weeks after this post, I found both std::array and std::vector are very good alternative to C-style array when std::array is not available.
You can encapsulate the tables in a private type, with a single const instance of that type in your object, then forward the relevant constructor parameters to the private object; this works because even a const object is non-const during its construction.
For example:
class MyClass {
const struct Tables {
double x[1000];
double y[200];
Tables(int i, double d) {
x[i] = d;
y[200 - i] = -d;
}
} tables;
public:
MyClass(int i, double d) : tables(i, d) {}
};
MyClass c(20, 5.5);
Another technique is to build the tables in an ephemeral mutable array whose lifetime is bounded by the lifetime of the constructor, then initialize the const array from those mutable arrays.
Using C++11 std::array (since array types can't be copy-initialized):
class MyClass {
static std::array<double, 1000> buildArray(...) {
std::array<double, 1000> array;
... // fill array
return array;
}
const std::array<double, 1000> mArray;
public:
MyClass(...) : mArray(buildArray(...)) {}
};
Note that std::array is easy to express in C++03; it doesn't depend on any C++11 language features.
If you're worried about the overhead of returning a large array, instrument it - even C++03 compilers are capable of optimising large array returns.
I think you could implement a class containing the actual non const array. That way you can easily compute the values in a constructor.
Then this class would only have to implement the operator[] to be usable as an array. Or it could also simply return a const reference to the array.
Implementation example :
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class const_array {
int *arr;
size_t size;
public:
const_array(size_t size, int typ): size(size) {
arr = new int[size];
size_t i;
int val = 0;
for (i=0; i<size; i++) {
val += typ;
arr[i] = val;
}
}
const_array(const const_array & src): size(src.size) {
arr = new int[size];
size_t i;
for (i=0; i<size; i++) {
arr[i] = src.arr[i];
}
}
~const_array() {
delete[] arr;
}
const int * const getArray() const {
return arr;
}
int getSize() const {
return size;
}
const int& operator[](int i) {
return arr[i];
}
};
int main() {
const_array a(16, 4);
// int *arr = a.getArray(); error
const int *arr = a.getArray();
int j = a[2];
int k = arr[2];
// int * pj = &(a[2]); error
const int * pj = &(a[2]);
const int * pk = &(arr[2]);
cout << "a[2]=" << j << " (" << pj << ") - a.getArray[2]="
<< j << " (" << pj << ")" << endl;
return 0;
}
Is it possible for a class to have a member which is a multidimensional array whose dimensions and extents are not known until runtime?
I have found (via this guide) a way to create a struct to easily nest std::arrays at compile time using template metaprogramming:
#include <array>
/*
this struct allows for the creation of an n-dimensional array type
*/
template <typename T,size_t CurrentDimExtent,size_t... NextDimExtent>
struct MultiDimArray{
public:
//define the type name nestedType to be a recursive template definition.
using nestedType=typename MultiDimArray<T,NextDimExtent...>::type;
using type=std::array<nestedType,CurrentDimExtent>;
};
/*
This struct is the template specialization which handles the base case of the
final dimensional extent
*/
template <typename T,size_t DimExtent>
struct MultiDimArray<T,DimExtent>{
using type=std::array<T,DimExtent>;
};
this still falls short of satisfying my requirement in two ways (that I know of):
In order to declare a variable (or a pointer to a variable) of this type you must state the dimensions.
This only works when the DimExtents are constant expressions (set at compile time).
To demonstrate why number 2 is a distinct problem, here is a class with a set number of dimensions (2) using a void* to reference the multidimensional array:
template <typename T>
class TwoDimGrid{
public:
TwoDimGrid(const size_t extent1,const size_t extent2):
_twoDimArray(new MultiDimArray<T,extent1,extent2>);
private:
void* _twoDimArray;
};
This will not compile as extent1 and extent2 are not constant expressions.
other notes:
I would like to see if it's possible to accomplish using std:array, rather than native arrays or a dynamically resizing container like std::vector.
Please use smart pointers where appropriate (I didn't as I'm not really sure how to handle a smart void pointer).
Edit
I have fallen into the trap of The XY Problem with X being the first sentence of this question and Y being how to accomplish it with std::array. I therefore created a new question and am leaving this one here in case it's ever possible to solve Y problem.
old school multidimensional arrays, something along these lines:
template <typename T>
class multi
{
T*myArray;
size_t x_dim;
size_t y_dim;
public:
multi(size_t x, size t y) : x_dim(x), y_dim(y)
{
myArray = new T[x*y];
}
T& get(int x, int y)
{
return myArray[x*y_dim+y];
}
};
template <typename T>
class vvc
{
//possible ragged array ..non rigorous approach
//with management memory cost per element
//clearly not as efficient as .... linearized access where access index is
//row size * r + column
//memory management courtesy of vector
public:
std::vector< std::vector<T> > v;
};
int double_vector()
{
int x1 = 5;
int x2 = 3;
std::vector<int> r(x2);
vvc<int> vv;
int k = 0;
for (int i1 = 0; i1 < x1; ++i1)
{
for (int i2 = 0; i2 < x2; ++i2)
{
k += 1;
r[i2] = k;
}
vv.v.push_back(r);
}
//inspect
cout << vv.v[0][0] << " first " << endl;
for (auto const & t1 : vv.v)
{
for (auto const &t2 : t1 )
{
cout << t2 << " ";
}
cout << endl;
}
return 0;
}
I would like to have an array of unsigned integers within a class, and its size should be [var][2], so the user will be able to choose var in runtime.
Is there a better way than allocating a two dimensional array (an allocated array of pointers to allocated arrays)?
In the class I have:
unsigned int *(*hashFunc);
And in the initializing function:
hashFunc = new unsigned int*[var];
for(unsigned int i = 0; i<var; ++i)
hashFunc[i] = new unsigned int[2];
I want to only allocate once, and I think it should somehow be possible because I only have one unknown dimension (var is unknown but 2 I know from the beginning).
Thanks!
If the sizes are known at compilation time, you should use std::array. If one of the dimensions are not known until runtime, you should use std::vector.
You can of course combine them:
std::vector<std::array<unsigned int, 2>> hashFunc;
The above declares hashFunc to be a vector of arrays, and the arrays is of size two and of type unsigned int, just like specified in the question.
Then to add a new inner array just use push_back of the vector:
hashFunc.push_back({{ 1, 2 }});
(And yes, double braces are needed. The outer to construct the std::array object, and the inner for the actual array data.)
Or if you want to set the size of the outer vector at once (for example if you (runtime) know the size beforehand) you could do e.g.
hashFunc = std::vector<std::array<unsigned int, 2>>(var);
Where var above is the size of the "first dimension". Now you can directly access hashFunc[x][y] where x is in range of var and y is zero or one.
(To answer the direct question.) You can declare the pointer as
int (*hashFunc)[2];
and allocate it in one shot as
hashFunc = new int[var][2];
There's two ways you can go about this. Either have a class with a bare pointer or encapsulate it with std::vector and std::array. Below is a sample of two possible implementations which do exactly the same.
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <array>
#include <stdexcept>
class TheClass {
public:
typedef int TwoInts[2];
TheClass(const std::size_t size) : m_size(size)
{
m_hashFunc = new TwoInts[m_size];
if (m_hashFunc == NULL) throw std::runtime_error("Ran out of memory.");
}
virtual ~TheClass()
{
delete [] m_hashFunc;
}
inline std::size_t size() const { return m_size; }
inline int& operator()(const std::size_t i, const std::size_t j) { return m_hashFunc[i][j]; }
inline const int& operator()(const std::size_t i, const std::size_t j) const { return m_hashFunc[i][j]; }
private:
std::size_t m_size;
TwoInts* m_hashFunc;
};
class AnotherClass {
public:
AnotherClass(const std::size_t size) : m_hashFunc(size)
{
// Nothing to do here.
}
// No destructor required.
inline std::size_t size() const { return m_hashFunc.size(); }
inline int& operator()(const std::size_t i, const std::size_t j) { return m_hashFunc[i][j]; }
inline const int& operator()(const std::size_t i, const std::size_t j) const { return m_hashFunc[i][j]; }
private:
std::vector<std::array<int, 2>> m_hashFunc;
};
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
if (argc < 2) return -1;
const std::size_t runtimesize = static_cast<std::size_t>(atoll(argv[1]));
const std::size_t i1 = rand() % runtimesize;
const std::size_t i2 = rand() % runtimesize;
TheClass instance1(runtimesize);
AnotherClass instance2(runtimesize);
instance1(i1,0) = instance2(i1,0) = 4;
instance1(i2,1) = instance2(i2,1) = 2;
std::cout << instance1(i1,0) << ' ' << instance2(i1,0) << std::endl;
std::cout << instance1(i2,1) << ' ' << instance2(i2,1) << std::endl;
std::cout << instance1.size() << std::endl;
std::cout << instance2.size() << std::endl;
// ... etc
return 0;
}