c++ Allocating memory on real time without vector - c++

Question

asking on stack again. I have an array wich I want to be always at the minimum size, because I have to send over the internet. The problem is, the program has no way to know what the minimum size is until the operation is finished. This leads me to having to ways: using vectors, or make an array of the maximum lenght the program could ever need, and then that it knows the minimum size, initialize a pointer with new and put the data there. But I can't use vectors because they require serialization to be sent, and both vector and serialization have overheads I don't want. Example:
unsigned short data[1270], // the maximum size the operation could take is 1270 shorts
*packet; // pointer
int counter; //this is to count how big "packet" will be
//example of operation, wich of course is different from my program
// in this case the operation takes 6 bytes
while(true) {
for (int i; i != 6; i++) {
counter++;
data[i]= 1;
}
packet=new unsigned short[counter];
for (int i; i!=counter; i++) {
packet[i]=data[i];
}
}
Like you might have noticed, this code runs in cycles, so the problem might be my way to repeatedly re-initialize the same pointer.
The problem in this code is, if I do:
std::cout<<counter<<" "<<sizeof(packet)/sizeof(unsigned short)<<" ";
counter variates in size (usually from 1 to 35), but the size of packet is always 2. I also tried delete [] before new, but it didn't solve the problem.
This issue could also be related to another part of the code, but here i am just asking:
Is my way of repeatedly allocate memory right?

Answer 1

Continually add to an std::vector while requesting to the compiler that the size allocated in heap memory not exceed the amount actually needed:
std::vector<int> vec;
std::size_t const maxSize = 10;
for (std::size_t i; i != maxSize; ++i)
{
vec.reserve(vec.size() + 1u);
vec.push_back(1234); // whatever you're adding
}
I should add though that I see no good reason for doing this under normal circumstances. The performance of this "program" could be severely hampered with no obvious benefit.

Answer 2

You can always use pointers and realloc. C++ is such a powerfull language because of its pointers, you don't need to use arrays.
Take a look at the cplusplus entry on realloc.
For your case you could use it like this:
new_packet = (unsigned short*) realloc (packet, new_size * sizeof(unsigned short));
if (new_packet!=NULL) {
packet = new_packet;
for(int i ; i < new_size ; i++)
packet[i] = new_values[i];
}
else {
if( packet != NULL )
free (packet);
puts ("Error (re)allocating memory");
exit (1);
}

Answer 3

Okay, I see a couple problems in your logic here. Lets start with the main one: Why do you need to alloc a whole fresh array with a copy of whats in data just to send it over a socket? It's not like sending a letter dude, send() will transfer a copy of the information, not literally move it over the network. It's perfectly fine to do this:
send(socket, data, counter * sizeof(unsigned short), 0);
There. You don't need a new pointer for anything.
Also, I don't know where you got the serialization thing from. Vectors are basically arrays that resize automatically, and will also delete themselves from memory once the function is done. You could do this:
std::vector<unsigned short> packet;
packet.reserve(counter);
for (std::size_t i = 0; i < counter; ++i)
packet[i] = data[i];
send(socket, &packet[0], packet.size() * sizeof(unsigned short), 0);
Or even shorten to:
std::vector<unsigned short> packet;
for (std::size_t i = 0; i < counter; ++i)
packet.push_back(data[i]);
But with this option the vector will resize counter times, what is performance consuming. Always set its size first if you have the information available.