This question already has answers here:
How to convert a std::string to const char* or char*
(11 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
Currently I have a complex function that myself and our team are not wanting to refactor to utilize std::string and it takes a char* which is modified. How would I properly make a deep-copy of string::c_str() into a char*? I am not looking to modify the string's internally stored char*.
char *cstr = string.c_str();
fails because c_str() is const.
You can do it like this:
const std::string::size_type size = string.size();
char *buffer = new char[size + 1]; //we need extra char for NUL
memcpy(buffer, string.c_str(), size + 1);
Rather than modify the existing function, I'd just create an overload that acts as a wrapper. Assuming the existing function is ret_type f(char *), I'd write the overload something like:
ret_type f(std::string s) {
return f(&s[0]);
}
Note passing s by value instead of reference, minimizing the effort expended to get a copy of the string.
In theory, this isn't guaranteed to work (i.e., a string's buffer isn't guaranteed to be contiguous) until C++03. In reality, that guarantee was fairly easy for the committee to add primarily because nobody knew of an implementation of std::string that did anything else.
Likewise, it could theoretically be missing the NUL terminator. If you're concerned about that possibility you could use return f(const_cast<char *>(s.c_str())); instead, or add an s.push_back('\0'); before the return:
ret_type f(std::string s) {
s.push_back('\0');
return f(&s[0]);
}
The obvious solution is:
std::vector<char> tmp( string.begin(), string.end() );
tmp.push_back( '\0' );
function( &tmp[0] );
(I rather like Jerry Coffin's solution, however.)
Related
This question already has answers here:
Can I get a non-const C string back from a C++ string?
(14 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I have a function in a library that takes in a char* and modifies the data.
I tried to give it the c_str() but c++ docs say it returns a const char*.
What can I do other than newing a char array and copying it into that?
You can use &str[0] or &*str.begin() as long as:
you preallocate explicitly all the space needed for the function with resize();
the function does not try to exceed the preallocated buffer size (you should pass str.size() as the argument for the buffer size);
when the function returns, you explicitly trim the string at the first \0 character you find, otherwise str.size() will return the "preallocated size" instead of the "logical" string size.
Notice: this is guaranteed to work in C++11 (where strings are guaranteed to be contiguous), but not in previous revisions of the standard; still, no implementation of the standard library that I know of ever did implement std::basic_string with noncontiguous storage.
Still, if you want to go safe, use std::vector<char> (guaranteed to be contiguous since C++03); initialize with whatever you want (you can copy its data from a string using the constructor that takes two iterators, adding a null character in the end), resize it as you would do with std::string and copy it back to a string stopping at the first \0 character.
Nothing.
Because std::string manages itself its contents, you can't have write access to the string's underlying data. That's undefined behavior.
However, creating and copying a char array is not hard:
std::string original("text");
std::vector<char> char_array(original.begin(), original.end());
char_array.push_back(0);
some_function(&char_array[0]);
If you know that the function will not modify beyond str.size() you can obtain a pointer in one of different ways:
void f( char* p, size_t s ); // update s characters in p
int main() {
std::string s=...;
f( &s[0], s.size() );
f( &s.front(), s.size() );
}
Note, this is guaranteed in C++11, but not in previous versions of the standard where it allowed for rope implementations (i.e. non-contiguous memory)
If your implementation will not try to increase the length of the string then:
C++11:
std::string data = "This is my string.";
func(&*data.begin());
C++03:
std::string data = "This is my string.";
std::vector<char> arr(data.begin(), data.end());
func(&arr[0]);
Here's a class that will generate a temporary buffer and automatically copy it to the string when it's destroyed.
class StringBuffer
{
public:
StringBuffer(std::string & str) : m_str(str)
{
m_buffer.push_back(0);
}
~StringBuffer()
{
m_str = &m_buffer[0];
}
char * Size(int maxlength)
{
m_buffer.resize(maxlength + 1, 0);
return &m_buffer[0];
}
private:
std::string & m_str;
std::vector<char> m_buffer;
};
And here's how you would use it:
// this is from a crusty old API that can't be changed
void GetString(char * str, int maxlength);
std::string mystring;
GetString(StringBuffer(mystring).Size(MAXLEN), MAXLEN);
If you think you've seen this code before, it's because I copied it from a question I wrote: Guaranteed lifetime of temporary in C++?
I have been working with C++ strings and trying to load char * strings into std::string by using C functions such as strcpy(). Since strcpy() takes char * as a parameter, I have to cast it which goes something like this:
std::string destination;
unsigned char *source;
strcpy((char*)destination.c_str(), (char*)source);
The code works fine and when I run the program in a debugger, the value of *source is stored in destination, but for some odd reason it won't print out with the statement
std::cout << destination;
I noticed that if I use
std::cout << destination.c_str();
The value prints out correctly and all is well. Why does this happen? Is there a better method of copying an unsigned char* or char* into a std::string (stringstreams?) This seems to only happen when I specify the string as foo.c_str() in a copying operation.
Edit: To answer the question "why would you do this?", I am using strcpy() as a plain example. There are other times that it's more complex than assignment. For example, having to copy only X amount of string A into string B using strncpy() or passing a std::string to a function from a C library that takes a char * as a parameter for a buffer.
Here's what you want
std::string destination = source;
What you're doing is wrong on so many levels... you're writing over the inner representation of a std::string... I mean... not cool man... it's much more complex than that, arrays being resized, read-only memory... the works.
This is not a good idea at all for two reasons:
destination.c_str() is a const pointer and casting away it's const and writing to it is undefined behavior.
You haven't set the size of the string, meaning that it won't even necessealy have a large enough buffer to hold the string which is likely to cause an access violation.
std::string has a constructor which allows it to be constructed from a char* so simply write:
std::string destination = source
Well what you are doing is undefined behavior. Your c_str() returns a const char * and is not meant to be assigned to. Why not use the defined constructor or assignment operator.
std::string defines an implicit conversion from const char* to std::string... so use that.
You decided to cast away an error as c_str() returns a const char*, i.e., it does not allow for writing to its underlying buffer. You did everything you could to get around that and it didn't work (you shouldn't be surprised at this).
c_str() returns a const char* for good reason. You have no idea if this pointer points to the string's underlying buffer. You have no idea if this pointer points to a memory block large enough to hold your new string. The library is using its interface to tell you exactly how the return value of c_str() should be used and you're ignoring that completely.
Do not do what you are doing!!!
I repeat!
DO NOT DO WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!
That it seems to sort of work when you do some weird things is a consequence of how the string class was implemented. You are almost certainly writing in memory you shouldn't be and a bunch of other bogus stuff.
When you need to interact with a C function that writes to a buffer there's two basic methods:
std::string read_from_sock(int sock) {
char buffer[1024] = "";
int recv = read(sock, buffer, 1024);
if (recv > 0) {
return std::string(buffer, buffer + recv);
}
return std::string();
}
Or you might try the peek method:
std::string read_from_sock(int sock) {
int recv = read(sock, 0, 0, MSG_PEEK);
if (recv > 0) {
std::vector<char> buf(recv);
recv = read(sock, &buf[0], recv, 0);
return std::string(buf.begin(), buf.end());
}
return std::string();
}
Of course, these are not very robust versions...but they illustrate the point.
First you should note that the value returned by c_str is a const char* and must not be modified. Actually it even does not have to point to the internal buffer of string.
In response to your edit:
having to copy only X amount of string A into string B using strncpy()
If string A is a char array, and string B is std::string, and strlen(A) >= X, then you can do this:
B.assign(A, A + X);
passing a std::string to a function from a C library that takes a char
* as a parameter for a buffer
If the parameter is actually const char *, you can use c_str() for that. But if it is just plain char *, and you are using a C++11 compliant compiler, then you can do the following:
c_function(&B[0]);
However, you need to ensure that there is room in the string for the data(same as if you were using a plain c-string), which you can do with a call to the resize() function. If the function writes an unspecified amount of characters to the string as a null-terminated c-string, then you will probably want to truncate the string afterward, like this:
B.resize(B.find('\0'));
The reason you can safely do this in a C++11 compiler and not a C++03 compiler is that in C++03, strings were not guaranteed by the standard to be contiguous, but in C++11, they are. If you want the guarantee in C++03, then you can use std::vector<char> instead.
I have a string
std::string s = "Stack Overflow";
That I need to copy into a vector.
This is how I am doing it
std::vector<char> v;
v.reserve(s.length()+1);
for(std::string::const_iterator it = s.begin(); it != s.end(); ++it)
{
v.push_back( *it );
}
v.push_back( '\0' );
But I hear range operation are more efficient. So I am thinking something like this
std::vector<char> v( s.begin(), s.end());
v.push_back('\0');
But is this better in this case? What about the potential re-allocation when inserting '\0'?
Another approach I am thinking is this
std::vector<char> v(s.length()+1);
std::strcpy(&v[0],s.c_str());
Perhaps fast but potentially unsafe?
EDIT
Has to be a null terminated string that can be used ( read/write ) inside a C function
If you really need a vector (e.g. because your C function modifies the string content), then the following should give you what you want, in one line:
std::vector<char> v(s.c_str(), s.c_str() + s.length() + 1);
Since c_str() returns a null-terminated string, you can just copy it whole into the vector.
However, I’m not actually sure how optimised this constructor is. I do know that std::copy is as optimised as it gets, so perhaps (measure!) the following is faster:
std::vector<char> v(s.length() + 1);
std::copy(s.c_str(), s.c_str() + s.length() + 1, v.begin());
If the C function doesn’t modify the string, just pass c_str() directly, and cast away const-ness. This is safe, as long as the C function only reads from the string.
In most cases, you don't need vector of char, as std::string pretty much is a container of char. std::string also have begin and end functions. And it also have c_str() function which returns the c-string which you can pass to any function which expects const char*, such as this:
void f(const char* str); //c-function
std::string s="some string";
f(s.c_str());
So why would you ever need std::vector<char>?
In my opinion, vector<char> is a very very rare need but if I ever need it, I would probably write this:
std::vector<char> v(s.begin(), s.end());
And to me, v.push_back('\0') doesn't make much sense. There is no such requirement on vector to have the last element as '\0' if the value_type is char.
Alright, as you said, std::string::c_str() returns const char*, and the c-function needs a non-const char* , then you can use std::vector because you want to take advantage of RAII which vector implements:
void g(char* s); //c-function
std::vector<char> v(s.begin(), s.end());
s.push_back('\0');
g(&v[0]);
which seems fine to me. But RAII is all that you need, then you've other option as well:
{
std::vector<char> memory(s.size()+1);
char *str = &memory[0]; //gets the memory!
std::strcpy(str, s.c_str());
g(str);
//....
} //<--- memory is destroyed here.
Use std::strcpy, std::memcpy or std::copy whichever is fast, as I cannot say which one is necessarily fast, without profiling.
I don't think std::strcpy(&v[0],s.c_str()); is a good choice. I think c_str() is allowed to re-allocate.
If you somehow "need" the \0 for dealing with C-APIs, then rely on string::c_str() to provide it to you, on request. In dont think that you need to put it into a vector-of-char, most things you can do with the string itself like with a vector.
Update:
If you make sure your vector gets initialized with 0s, you can circumvent the call to c_str by using strncopy:
std::vector<char> v(s.length()+1, 0); // added '0'
std::strncpy(&v[0],&s[0],s.length()); // no c_str()
This question already has answers here:
Closed 12 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
how to copy char * into a string and vice-versa
I have to pass a value into a method that required a char *
MyMethod(char * parameter)
{
// code
}
However, the parameter I need to feed it is currently a std::string. How do I convert the std::string to a char *?
std::string myStringParameter = //whatever
char * myCharParameter = //Convert here somehow
MyMethod(myCharParameter);
You are looking for the c_str() method:
char * myCharParameter = myStringParameter.c_str();
You might need to const_cast the return to get it into a char * instead of a const char *. Refrain from modifying the string though; it is the internal buffer of the std::string object. If you actually need to modify the string, you should use strncpy to copy it to another buffer:
char * myCharParameter = new char[myStringParameter.length() + 1];
strncpy(myCharParameter, myStringParameter.c_str(), myStringParameter.length() + 1);
// And later...
myStringParameter.assign(myCharParameter);
delete [] myCharParameter;
It depends on whether MyMethod actually changes the string that's passed in.
If the only thing you know about it is the signature, then you have to assume it could change the string, and copy it into a temporary buffer per #jdmichal's answer.
It's also possible that the developer of this API didn't know or care about const correctness. So the function takes in a non-const buffer even though it doesn't change it.
If that's the case you can get by with:
MyMethod(const_cast<char*>(myStringParameter.c_str());
In my career I have come across more than a few API's taking in non-const strings that should have been const.
If the function is actually going to modify the string, you'd better create a separate copy:
std::string str = // ...
char* cstr = strdup(str.c_str());
MyMethod(cstr);
// If you want to preserve the changes made:
// str = cstr;
free(cstr);
Const-correctness in C++ is still giving me headaches. In working with some old C code, I find myself needing to assign turn a C++ string object into a C string and assign it to a variable. However, the variable is a char * and c_str() returns a const char []. Is there a good way to get around this without having to roll my own function to do it?
edit: I am also trying to avoid calling new. I will gladly trade slightly more complicated code for less memory leaks.
C++17 and newer:
foo(s.data(), s.size());
C++11, C++14:
foo(&s[0], s.size());
However this needs a note of caution: The result of &s[0]/s.data()/s.c_str() is only guaranteed to be valid until any member function is invoked that might change the string. So you should not store the result of these operations anywhere. The safest is to be done with them at the end of the full expression, as my examples do.
Pre C++-11 answer:
Since for to me inexplicable reasons nobody answered this the way I do now, and since other questions are now being closed pointing to this one, I'll add this here, even though coming a year too late will mean that it hangs at the very bottom of the pile...
With C++03, std::string isn't guaranteed to store its characters in a contiguous piece of memory, and the result of c_str() doesn't need to point to the string's internal buffer, so the only way guaranteed to work is this:
std::vector<char> buffer(s.begin(), s.end());
foo(&buffer[0], buffer.size());
s.assign(buffer.begin(), buffer.end());
This is no longer true in C++11.
There is an important distinction you need to make here: is the char* to which you wish to assign this "morally constant"? That is, is casting away const-ness just a technicality, and you really will still treat the string as a const? In that case, you can use a cast - either C-style or a C++-style const_cast. As long as you (and anyone else who ever maintains this code) have the discipline to treat that char* as a const char*, you'll be fine, but the compiler will no longer be watching your back, so if you ever treat it as a non-const you may be modifying a buffer that something else in your code relies upon.
If your char* is going to be treated as non-const, and you intend to modify what it points to, you must copy the returned string, not cast away its const-ness.
I guess there is always strcpy.
Or use char* strings in the parts of your C++ code that must interface with the old stuff.
Or refactor the existing code to compile with the C++ compiler and then to use std:string.
There's always const_cast...
std::string s("hello world");
char *p = const_cast<char *>(s.c_str());
Of course, that's basically subverting the type system, but sometimes it's necessary when integrating with older code.
If you can afford extra allocation, instead of a recommended strcpy I would consider using std::vector<char> like this:
// suppose you have your string:
std::string some_string("hello world");
// you can make a vector from it like this:
std::vector<char> some_buffer(some_string.begin(), some_string.end());
// suppose your C function is declared like this:
// some_c_function(char *buffer);
// you can just pass this vector to it like this:
some_c_function(&some_buffer[0]);
// if that function wants a buffer size as well,
// just give it some_buffer.size()
To me this is a bit more of a C++ way than strcpy. Take a look at Meyers' Effective STL Item 16 for a much nicer explanation than I could ever provide.
You can use the copy method:
len = myStr.copy(cStr, myStr.length());
cStr[len] = '\0';
Where myStr is your C++ string and cStr a char * with at least myStr.length()+1 size. Also, len is of type size_t and is needed, because copy doesn't null-terminate cStr.
Just use const_cast<char*>(str.data())
Do not feel bad or weird about it, it's perfectly good style to do this.
It's guaranteed to work in C++11. The fact that it's const qualified at all is arguably a mistake by the original standard before it; in C++03 it was possible to implement string as a discontinuous list of memory, but no one ever did it. There is not a compiler on earth that implements string as anything other than a contiguous block of memory, so feel free to treat it as such with complete confidence.
If you know that the std::string is not going to change, a C-style cast will work.
std::string s("hello");
char *p = (char *)s.c_str();
Of course, p is pointing to some buffer managed by the std::string. If the std::string goes out of scope or the buffer is changed (i.e., written to), p will probably be invalid.
The safest thing to do would be to copy the string if refactoring the code is out of the question.
std::string vString;
vString.resize(256); // allocate some space, up to you
char* vStringPtr(&vString.front());
// assign the value to the string (by using a function that copies the value).
// don't exceed vString.size() here!
// now make sure you erase the extra capacity after the first encountered \0.
vString.erase(std::find(vString.begin(), vString.end(), 0), vString.end());
// and here you have the C++ string with the proper value and bounds.
This is how you turn a C++ string to a C string. But make sure you know what you're doing, as it's really easy to step out of bounds using raw string functions. There are moments when this is necessary.
If c_str() is returning to you a copy of the string object internal buffer, you can just use const_cast<>.
However, if c_str() is giving you direct access tot he string object internal buffer, make an explicit copy, instead of removing the const.
Since c_str() gives you direct const access to the data structure, you probably shouldn't cast it. The simplest way to do it without having to preallocate a buffer is to just use strdup.
char* tmpptr;
tmpptr = strdup(myStringVar.c_str();
oldfunction(tmpptr);
free tmpptr;
It's quick, easy, and correct.
In CPP, if you want a char * from a string.c_str()
(to give it for example to a function that only takes a char *),
you can cast it to char * directly to lose the const from .c_str()
Example:
launchGame((char *) string.c_str());
C++17 adds a char* string::data() noexcept overload. So if your string object isn't const, the pointer returned by data() isn't either and you can use that.
Is it really that difficult to do yourself?
#include <string>
#include <cstring>
char *convert(std::string str)
{
size_t len = str.length();
char *buf = new char[len + 1];
memcpy(buf, str.data(), len);
buf[len] = '\0';
return buf;
}
char *convert(std::string str, char *buf, size_t len)
{
memcpy(buf, str.data(), len - 1);
buf[len - 1] = '\0';
return buf;
}
// A crazy template solution to avoid passing in the array length
// but loses the ability to pass in a dynamically allocated buffer
template <size_t len>
char *convert(std::string str, char (&buf)[len])
{
memcpy(buf, str.data(), len - 1);
buf[len - 1] = '\0';
return buf;
}
Usage:
std::string str = "Hello";
// Use buffer we've allocated
char buf[10];
convert(str, buf);
// Use buffer allocated for us
char *buf = convert(str);
delete [] buf;
// Use dynamic buffer of known length
buf = new char[10];
convert(str, buf, 10);
delete [] buf;