C++ assignment error [closed] - c++

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 9 years ago.
I am new to C++ and I have the code below. I am trying to assign int board[] = create_board();, like I would in java, but it gives me the error
Initializer failed to determine size of board.
Also when I remove that line of code, my print statement is not shown in the command prompt regardless.
Is there something that I am doing wrong in printing the array as well?
Code:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int* create_board() {
int* pointer;
int board[15];
pointer=board;
for(int i=0; i<16; i++)
board[i] = 1;
return pointer;
}
int main () {
int board[] = create_board();
for (int i; i<16; i++)
std::cout << board[i];
return 0;
}

As a beginner, I think you should actually be using std::vector instead of raw pointers. Here is an example of your program that uses it:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
std::vector<int> create_board()
{
return std::vector<int>(16, 1); // declare 16 integers whose value is 1
}
int main()
{
std::vector<int> board = create_board();
for (int i = 0; i < 16; ++i)
std::cout << board[i];
}
In C++11, this might look like the following:
#include <iostream>
#include <array>
int main()
{
std::array<int, 16> array{};
array.fill(1);
for (auto var : array) std::cout << var << '\n';
}

Two things wrong really:
You can't use an array as an lvalue, instead you need to use a pointer. E.g.
int* board = create_board();
The bigger issue, however, is that in your create_board() function you are returning a pointer to a stack-based array that will be destroyed as soon as your function returns. You need to either allocate this using malloc or new, or make it static in order to return a pointer to it that can be used outside the function.

Memory management is very tricky. You should read more about it before trying to mess with manual memory. I'd recommend sticking with stl collections and the like for now.
As for the actual question, the array you declared lives on the stack, meaning that it disappears as soon as the function returns. This means that the pointer you returned is now a dangling pointer, meaning that accessing it gives undefined behavior.
You've also got an off by one error. You made an array of size 15, but you're accessing 16 elements of it.
Here's how things might look if you were using a std::array (essentially a type safe, collection like wrapper over raw arrays) and returned by value instead of pointer (keep things simple for now).
For normal arraylike collections, you'd use a std::vector, but for a small fixed size array like this, you might as well just use std::array. Vectors are the C++ equivalent of Java's ArrayList, so they can change size.
#include <iostream>
#include <array>
std::array<int, 16> create_board()
{
std::array<int, 16> board;
for(int i=0; i<16; i++)
board[i] = 1;
return board;
}
int
main ()
{
std::array<int, 16> board = create_board();
for (int i; i<16; i++)
std::cout << board[i];
return 0;
}

Related

"expected expression" error when initializing an empty array [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
A method to assign the same value to all elements in an array
(4 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
I am trying to initialize an empty array that I initialized earlier in the program. However, whenever I compile my program I am given the error
expected an expression (C/C++(29))
Here is what my code looks like:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(){
const int MAX_SIZE = 6;
int array[MAX_SIZE] = {12,-3,24,65,92,11};
for(int i=0;i<MAX_SIZE;i++){
cout << array[i] << " ";
}
array[MAX_SIZE] = {};
return 0;
}
The error is indicated right on the first curly brace of the empty array initialization. Also I am using Visual Studio Code on a Mac OS Big Sur.
This expression:
array[MAX_SIZE] = {};
Attempts to assign a value at index 6 to something that isn't an array. That's why it generates a compiler error. (And if it didn't, it would be assigning something to an invalid index in an array!)
You might be temped to think this...
array = {};
...would work, since it's similar for resetting members of objects to a default initialized state. But it doesn't work for arrays.
But this works:
std::fill(a, a+MAX_SIZE, 0); // #include <algorithm> if needed
And will assign every element in a to 0
Old school, "C" way for doing the same thing:
memset(a, '\0', MAX_SIZE*sizeof(int)); // #include <string.h> if needed
Or just manually
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_SIZE; i++) {
a[i] = 0;
}
Your trouble lies here: array[MAX_SIZE] = {};
The initialization syntax only work when you are initializing an array.
Though it does actually compile for me with GCC, the resulting program then crashes.
If you want to fill the array with a value. Either zero or something else, you may want to use std::fill.
Plain C-style arrays are not assignable, the type array[size] = {...}; syntax is only for declaration and initialisation.
You can use std::array<T,N> instead, like this:
#include <array>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(){
const int MAX_SIZE = 6;
std::array<int, MAX_SIZE> arr = {12,-3,24,65,92,11};
for(int i=0;i<MAX_SIZE;i++){
cout << arr[i] << " ";
}
// reset all elements back to 0
arr.fill(0);
return 0;
}

What is the difference between allocating a specific sized array vs declaring a specific sized array in function in cpp? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
What is a dangling pointer?
(7 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
Normally a scope of an array in a function ends with it. But if I allocate beforehand then it perfectly returns the array. So what's the difference between allocating array or declaring array?
I am writing the code and the place where I am confused. Is it because of dynamic memory allocation of the first declaration or something else. Can someone elaborate please?
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
#define N 10
using namespace std;
int * get_array() {
int * p = new int[N];
//|--- by declaring like this, the array was perfectly returned.
int p[N];
//|--- but is case of this declaration the array returned showed garbage value in the main function.
for(int i = 0; i < N; ++i) p[i] = i;
return p;
}
int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
int * M = get_array();
for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i) {
cout << M[i] << endl;
}
return 0;
}
In the second case the array is created in the heap of the function, so when you exit the function, that array doesn't exists anymore.
In the first case, you're reserving memory space to put your array, so isn't local to the function per se, and you must handle its destruction

Array of pointers to structs

EDIT: Im quite new to c++ and programming as a whole.
I'm supposed to make a program where i use stucts and and an array of structs.
Security council < > Member of Security council
My task was to use the concept of "UML aggregation" to create a program where I use structs and struct arrays. (I hope you understand what I'm trying to say)
Since a Member of a Security council is a part of a Security council, and not the other way around, the struct of Security council must have an array of its members.(bear with me)
//example
struct Member_sc{
char * name;
int age;
};
struct Security_council{
Member_sc members[10];
};
Now, I've created this program and everything works perfectly (according to my teacher), but now she told me create an exact copy, but instead of the "members" array I must use an array of pointers to the Member_sc structs. Since I havent completely figured out how pointers work, I have come across some problems.
I can post the code to the original program if needed, but it contains 4 files(main, header, and some function files) and it would be a pain to try and post it here.
here is the prototype (all in one file, for now)
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
struct member_sc{
string name;
};
struct security_council{
member_sc *point;
security_council **search; // ignore this for now
int n;
security_council():n(0){}
};
void in_mem( member_sc &x){
getline(cin,x.name);
}
void out_mem(member_sc &x){
cout<<x.name<<endl;
}
void in_SC(security_council &q, member_sc &x){
int num; //number of members
cin>>num;
for(int i=0; i<num; ++i){
in_mem(x);
q.point[q.n]=x;
q.n++;
}
}
void out_SC(security_council &q,member_sc &x){
for(int i=0; i<q.n; ++i){
out_mem(q.point[i]);
}
}
int main(){
member_sc y;
security_council x;
in_mem(y); // works
out_mem(y); // works
in_SC(x,y); // crashes after i input the number of members i want
out_SC(x,y); //
system("pause");
return 0;
}
The program crashes after you input the number of members you want in your Security council.
Is my way of thinking right? or should I use dynamic memory allocation?
in addition to that (my teacher gave me an additional task) create a search function using pointers. i thought that pointer to pointer may be good for that, but im not sure.
Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.
( i think ill figure out the search thingy once i figure out how pointers to structs work)
The first part of your issue is this:
cin >> num;
this reads only the digits that have been typed and stops at the newline. Then, in in_mem the call to getline immediately reads a newline. You need to do:
cin >> num;
cin.ignore();
this will drain the input stream of any remaining input, or catch up so to speak.
However your core problem is that you don't allocate any memory for "point" to point to.
A pointer is just a variable holding a value that happens to be the address (offset from 0) of a thing in memory. If you are going to the airport and write "Gate 23" on a post-it note, the post it note is a pointer and "Gate 23" is the value.
In your code, that variable is uninitialized and will either be 0, if you are lucky, or some random address in memory if you aren't so lucky.
To the airport analogy: you arrive at the airport and find that your post-it note has "pizza" written on it. Not helpful.
Your teacher has actually specified an "array of pointers". Break that down: pointer to what? member_sc, that's member_sc*. And now make it an array
member_sc* pointers[10];
NOTE: This is not good, modern C++ - in modern C++ you would use something called a smart pointer (std::unique_ptr) probably.
std::unique_ptr<member_sc[]> pointers(new member_sc[10]);
Now you have 10 pointers instead of just one, and all of them will need some allocation to point to. The easiest way to do this is with the new keyword and the copy constructor:
for (int i = 0; i < num; i++) {
in_mem(x);
pointers[q.n] = new member_sc(x); // make a clone of x
q.n++;
}
or in modern C++
for (int i = 0; i < num; i++) {
in_mem(x); // x is temporary for reading in
pointers[q.n] = std::make_unique<member_sc>(x);
q.n++;
}
However there is a limitation with this approach: you can only have upto 10 security council members. How do you work around this? Well, the modern C++ answer would be to use a std::vector
std::vector<member_sc> members;
// ditch n - vector tracks it for you.
// ...
for (int i = 0; i < num; ++i) {
in_mem(x);
q.members.push_back(x);
// q.n is replaced with q.members.size()
// which is tracked automatically for you
}
but I'm guessing your teacher wants you to actually understand pointers before you get to forget about them with modern luxuries.
We need to re-use the pointer stuff we've just used above and change "pointers" to an array of pointers.
Which means we're going to want a pointer to a set of pointer-to-member_sc.
member_sc** pointers;
We'll need to assign some memory for this to point to:
cin >> num;
cin.ignore();
if (num == 0) {
// do something
return;
}
pointers = new member_sc[num];
luckily, using a pointer to an array is as easy as using an array, the only major difference being that you lose the size-of-array information -- all you have is the address, not the dimensions.
for (int i = 0; i < num; i++) {
in_mem(x);
q.pointers[i] = new member_sc(x);
q.n++;
}
I'm deliberately not providing you with a complete working example because this is obviously for a class.
You never initialize the memory that the point member refers to, yet then in statement q.point[q.n]=x; you attempt to use it.
Basically, after you read in the number of members, and before the for loop where you read in the individual members, you need to allocate an array of an appropriate number of member_sc objects and store it in q.point. Don't forget to free this memory when done using it.
Once you do that, you can also remove the member_sc &x argument from both in_SC and out_SC, as that will become unnecessary.
Finally, some validation of your input seems to be in place. Consider what will happen if the user enters a negative number, and you attempt to use that directly to determine the size of memory to allocate.
Here's a simple example showing how to use a dynamically allocated array of structures:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
struct member_sc {
std::string name;
};
void test_array(int count)
{
if (count <= 0) {
return; // Error
}
// Allocate an array of appropriate size
member_sc* members = new member_sc[count];
if (members == nullptr) {
return; // Error
}
// ... fill in the individual array elements
for(int i(0); i < count; ++i) {
// ... read from input stream
// I'll just generate some names to keep it simple
members[i].name = "User A";
members[i].name[5] += i; // Change the last character, so we have different names
}
// Now let's try printing out the members...
for(int i(0); i < count; ++i) {
std::cout << i << ": " << members[i].name << "\n";
}
delete[] members;
}
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
for(int count(1); count <= 10; ++count) {
std::cout << "Test count=" << count << "\n";
test_array(count);
std::cout << "\n";
}
return 0;
}
Example on Coliru
Of course, there are many other issues with this style of code, but I believe that's beside the point of this question. For example:
Instead of using bare pointers, it would be more appropriate to use some kind of a smart pointer.
Instead of a simple array, use some kind of collection, such as a vector.
Since you are asked to use an array of pointers, do so: replace
Member_sc members[10];
with
Member_sc* members[10];
Then fill out that array using dynamic memory allocation. As a matter of good form, at the end of the program remember to release the dynamic memory you have used.

a function which convert integer to an array of digits c++ [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Can a local variable's memory be accessed outside its scope?
(20 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
int *Arr(int y,int size){
int arg[size];
for(int i=size-1;i>=0;i--){
arg[i]=y%10;
y=y/10;
}
return arg;
}
int main(){
int *p=Arr(2587,4);
for(int j=0;j<4;j++){
cout<<p[j]<<" ";
}
return 0;
}
> Blockquote
I dont why this isn't working ...I'm trying to back an array but the problem is in the second digits.Can somebody help ;) thanks
The problem is you are putting your result into a local array that is destroyed when the function ends. You need to dynamicaly allocate the array so that its life-span is not limited to the function it was created in:
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
int *Arr(int y, int size)
{
// This local array will be destroyed when the function ends
// int arg[size];
// Do this instead: allocate non-local memory
int* arg = new int[size];
for(int i = size - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
arg[i] = y % 10;
y = y / 10;
}
return arg;
}
int main()
{
int *p = Arr(2587, 4);
for(int j = 0; j < 4; j++)
{
cout << p[j] << " ";
}
// You need to manually free the non-local memory
delete[] p; // free memory
return 0;
}
NOTE:
Allocating dynamic memory using new is to be avoided if possible. You may want to study up on smart pointers for managing it.
Also, in real C++ code, you would use a container like std::vector<int> rather than a builtin array
Of course it is not working.
At best, the behaviour is undefined, since Arg() is returning the address of a local variable (arg) that no longer exists for main(). main() uses that returned address when it is not the address of anything that exists as far as your program is concerned.
There is also the incidental problem that int arg[size], where size is not fixed at compile time, is not valid C++. Depending on how exacting your compiler is (some C++ compilers reject constructs that are not valid C++, but others accept extensions like this) your code will not even compile successfully.
To fix the problem, have your function return a std::vector<int> (vector is templated container defined in the standard header <vector>). Then all your function needs to do is add the values to a local vector, which CAN be returned safely by value to the caller.
If you do it right, you won't even need to use a pointer anywhere in your code.

Returning arrays from a function in c++

I am trying to return an array from a function:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int* uni(int *a,int *b)
{
int c[10];
int i=0;
while(a[i]!=-1)
{
c[i]=a[i];
i++;
}
for(;i<10;i++)
c[i]=b[i-5];
return c;
}
int main()
{
int a[10]={1,3,3,8,4,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1};
int b[5]={1,3,4,3,0};
int *c=uni(a,b);
for(int i=0;i<10;i++)
cout<<c[i]<<" ";
cout<<"\n";
return 0;
}
I pass two arrays from my main() into my uni() function. There I create a new array c[10] which I return to my main().
In my uni() function I try to merge the non-negative numbers in the two arrays a and b.
But I get something like this as my output.
1 -1078199700 134514080 -1078199656 -1216637148 134519488 134519297 134519488 8 -1078199700
Whereas when I try to print the values of c[10] in the uni() function it prints the correct values. Why does this happen??
Is this something related to the stack?? Because I have tried searching about this error of mine, and I found a few places on stackoverflow, where it says that do not allocate on stack but I couldn't understand it.
Further it would become very easy if I allocate my array globally, but if this is the case then everything shall be declared globally?? Why are we even worried about passing pointers from functions?? (I have a chapter in my book for passing pointers)
Admittedly, the std::vector or std::array approach would be the way to go.
However, just to round things out (and if this is a school project, where the teacher gives you the obligatory "you can't use STL"), the other alternative that will avoid pointer usage is to wrap the array inside a struct and return the instance of the struct.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
struct myArray
{
int array[10];
};
myArray uni(int *a,int *b)
{
myArray c;
int i=0;
while(a[i]!=-1)
{
c.array[i]=a[i];
i++;
}
for(;i<10;i++)
c.array[i]=b[i-5];
return c;
}
int main()
{
int a[10]={1,3,3,8,4,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1};
int b[5]={1,3,4,3,0};
myArray c = uni(a,b);
for(int i=0;i<10;i++)
cout << c.array[i] << " ";
cout << "\n";
return 0;
}
Note that the struct is returned by value, and this return value is assigned in main.
You have the value semantics of returning an instance, plus the struct will get copied, including the array that is internal within it.
Live Example
You're returning a pointer to a local object. In the uni function, the variable c is allocated on the stack. At the end of that function, all of that memory is released and in your for loop you are getting undefined results.
As suggested in the comments, std::array or std::vector will give you copy constructors that will allow you to return the object by value as you're trying to do. Otherwise you'll have to resort to something like passing your output array in as an argument.
You are returning a pointer to an array that is being deallocated at the return statement. It's a dangling pointer. It's UB.
Use an std::vector or std::array and return by value. There are compiler optimizations that will avoid inefficiencies.