C++: joining array together - is it possible with pointers WITHOUT copying? - c++

Question

as in the title is it possible to join a number of arrays together without copying and only using pointers? I'm spending a significant amount of computation time copying smaller arrays into larger ones.
note I can't used vectors since umfpack (some matrix solving library) does not allow me to or i don't know how.
As an example:
int n = 5;
// dynamically allocate array with use of pointer
int *a = new int[n];
// define array pointed by *a as [1 2 3 4 5]
for(int i=0;i<n;i++) {
a[i]=i+1;
}
// pointer to array of pointers ??? --> this does not work
int *large_a = new int[4];
for(int i=0;i<4;i++) {
large_a[i] = a;
}
Note: There is already a simple solution I know and that is just to iteratively copy them to a new large array, but would be nice to know if there is no need to copy repeated blocks that are stored throughout the duration of the program. I'm in a learning curve atm.
thanks for reading everyone

Answer 1

as in the title is it possible to join a number of arrays together without copying and only using pointers?
In short, no.
A pointer is simply an address into memory - like a street address. You can't move two houses next to each other, just by copying their addresses around. Nor can you move two houses together by changing their addresses. Changing the address doesn't move the house, it points to a new house.
note I can't used vectors since umfpack (some matrix solving library) does not allow me to or i don't know how.
In most cases, you can pass the address of the first element of a std::vector when an array is expected.
std::vector a = {0, 1, 2}; // C++0x initialization
void c_fn_call(int*);
c_fn_call(&a[0]);
This works because vector guarantees that the storage for its contents is always contiguous.
However, when you insert or erase an element from a vector, it invalidates pointers and iterators that came from it. Any pointers you might have gotten from taking an element's address no longer point to the vector, if the storage that it has allocated must change size.

Answer 2

No. The memory of two arrays are not necessarily contiguous so there is no way to join them without copying. And array elements must be in contiguous memory...or pointer access would not be possible.

Answer 3

I'd probably use memcpy/memmove, which is still going to be copying the memory around, but at least it's been optimized and tested by your compiler vendor.
Of course, the "real" C++ way of doing it would be to use standard containers and iterators. If you've got memory scattered all over the place like this, it sounds like a better idea to me to use a linked list, unless you are going to do a lot of random access operations.
Also, keep in mind that if you use pointers and dynamically allocated arrays instead of standard containers, it's a lot easier to cause memory leaks and other problems. I know sometimes you don't have a choice, but just saying.

Answer 4

If you want to join arrays without copying the elements and at the same time you want to access the elements using subscript operator i.e [], then that isn't possible without writing a class which encapsulates all such functionalities.
I wrote the following class with minimal consideration, but it demonstrates the basic idea, which you can further edit if you want it to have functionalities which it's not currently having. There should be few error also, which I didn't write, just to make it look shorter, but I believe you will understand the code, and handle error cases accordingly.
template<typename T>
class joinable_array
{
std::vector<T*> m_data;
std::vector<size_t> m_size;
size_t m_allsize;
public:
joinable_array() : m_allsize() { }
joinable_array(T *a, size_t len) : m_allsize() { join(a,len);}
void join(T *a, size_t len)
{
m_data.push_back(a);
m_size.push_back(len);
m_allsize += len;
}
T & operator[](size_t i)
{
index ix = get_index(i);
return m_data[ix.v][ix.i];
}
const T & operator[](size_t i) const
{
index ix = get_index(i);
return m_data[ix.v][ix.i];
}
size_t size() const { return m_allsize; }
private:
struct index
{
size_t v;
size_t i;
};
index get_index(size_t i) const
{
index ix = { 0, i};
for(auto it = m_size.begin(); it != m_size.end(); it++)
{
if ( ix.i >= *it ) { ix.i -= *it; ix.v++; }
else break;
}
return ix;
}
};
And here is one test code:
#define alen(a) sizeof(a)/sizeof(*a)
int main() {
int a[] = {1,2,3,4,5,6};
int b[] = {11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18};
joinable_array<int> arr(a,alen(a));
arr.join(b, alen(b));
arr.join(a, alen(a)); //join it again!
for(size_t i = 0 ; i < arr.size() ; i++ )
std::cout << arr[i] << " ";
}
Output:
1 2 3 4 5 6 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 2 3 4 5 6
Online demo : http://ideone.com/VRSJI

Answer 5

Here's how to do it properly:
template<class T, class K1, class K2>
class JoinArray {
JoinArray(K1 &k1, K2 &k2) : k1(k1), k2(k2) { }
T operator[](int i) const { int s = k1.size(); if (i < s) return k1.operator[](i); else return k2.operator[](i-s); }
int size() const { return k1.size() + k2.size(); }
private:
K1 &k1;
K2 &k2;
};
template<class T, class K1, class K2>
JoinArray<T,K1,K2> join(K1 &k1, K2 &k2) { return JoinArray<T,K1,K2>(k1,k2); }
template<class T>
class NativeArray
{
NativeArray(T *ptr, int size) : ptr(ptr), size(size) { }
T operator[](int i) const { return ptr[i]; }
int size() const { return size; }
private:
T *ptr;
int size;
};
int main() {
int array[2] = { 0,1 };
int array2[2] = { 2,3 };
NativeArray<int> na(array, 2);
NativeArray<int> na2(array2, 2);
auto joinarray = join(na,na2);
}

Answer 6

A variable that is a pointer to a pointer must be declared as such.
This is done by placing an additional asterik in front of its name.
Hence, int **large_a = new int*[4]; Your large_a goes and find a pointer, while you've defined it as a pointer to an int. It should be defined (declared) as a pointer to a pointer variable. Just as int **large_a; could be enough.