I am writing a programm in C++. In my programm I need to create an array with dynamic size inside one function, but this array should be also accessable for other functions. I will not post here my code, just write one dummy example.
char *array;
void function_1() {
array = new char(3);
array[0] = "value 1";
array[1] = "value 2";
array[2] = "value 3";
}
void function_2() {
array[0] = "new value 1";
}
int main() {
function_1();
function_2();
delete[] array;
}
My question is: I am not sure, if the array will exist outside the function_1, where it was initialised, until I delocate a memory of array.
Or the array will have just a behaviour of local variable inside one function. What means, that the memory, which stores the array values, will be dellocated after the function is finished and the memory addresses of my array can be rewroten with something else later in my programm.
Thank you.
First, of course it will exist outside, that's all what dynamic allocation is about. Also, the variable itself is global. Also, it should be a char const** array; and the allocation should be new char const*[3] (note the square brackets). The const because you won't change the contents of the strings here.
Second, don't do that. Just put it in a class and use a std::vector!
#include <vector>
class Foo{
public:
function_1(){
_array.push_back("value 1");
_array.push_back("value 2");
_array.push_back("value 3");
}
function_2(){
_array[0] = ("new value 1");
}
private:
std::vector<std::string> _array;
};
int main(){
Foo f;
f.function_1();
f.function_2();
}
Even better, have a std::vector<std::string>, so you can safely modify the contents without having to worry about memory management. Though, to this won't be a single block any more. Now I got to ask, how exactly do you want to pass the buffer to the socket?
You actually have a fatal error in your function_1(). The following code will cause array to point to a character, with the value 3. Then, it will overwrite various parts of neighboring memory, basically causing a buffer overflow.
void function_1() {
array = new char(3);
array[0] = "value 1";
array[1] = "value 2";
array[2] = "value 3";
}
What you probably want to do is create something like:
char **array;
array = new char*[3];
array[0] = new char[strlen(...)];
array[0] = strncpy(array[0], ..., strlen(...)];
// etc
A much safer and cleaner way of accomplishing this would be to do what Xeo is suggesting, and using a std::vector instead of a plain array.
Since array is global, it is visible to other functions. Memory allocated with new[] stays around until it is freed by delete[].
It will exist and be global, because the char * array pointer is global.
The memory that you allocate in function1 will stay allocated after the program exits the scope of the function and will work as expected in functions 2 and 3. Notice however, that behaviour is undefined if you call functions 2 and 3 before function one. In general though, what you're trying to do here looks like bad design, but for the sake of the question I won't bug you about that now :)
It would greatly improve the clarity of your code if you'd:
use a std::vector, especially if you plan to resize it later
use a std::string to represent strings
pass the array or vector by reference to the functions that need it.
int main() {
std::vector<std::string> vect;
function_1(vect);
function_2(vect);
}
where your functions look like:
void function_1(std::vector<std::string> & Vect)
typedefs help manage the argument types
This way you won't have to worry about leaks as the vector will deallocate itself when out of scope.
Related
I would like to perform a deep copy of a char**, but I have no idea how to allocate memory / copy this datatype. This is for a copy constructor in a class that contains a char**. For example, lets say I have this code:
char ** arr1 = new char*[20];
arr1[0] = (char*)"This is index 1";
arr1[1] = (char*)"This is index 2";
char ** arr2;
How do I deep copy the contents of arr1 into arr2? Any help is appreciated!
It’s for a programming assignment, and the teacher wants all strings
to be stored as char*,...
You can tell your teacher that std::string does store strings as char*. If he still doesnt like you to use std::string you should write your own wrapper, because working with bare char* is what you do when you write C, but not in C++. You should write a:
struct my_string {
char* data;
... constructor, operator[], etc...
};
You basically dont need to write more code than you already do, but you should put it in the right place (ie hide it behind a nice interface). You will immediately see the benefit of it when you eg consider ...
...so an array of strings has to be stored as an array of char*.
No. An array of strings is std::array<my_string> (or std::vector<my_string> if it is supposed to be dynamic). And if your teacher insists on not using std::vector, then you should do the same as you just did for strings for vectors (ie encapsulate all the dirty pointer and memory stuff in one place).
This seems more like a C question, but here is an example:
char **AllocateAndDeepCopy(char **arr1, int arr1size)
{
unsigned int i;
char **arr2;
/* Allocate string array */
arr2 = new char*[arr1size];
/* Iterate array elements */
for (i=0; i<arr1size; i++) {
/* Allocate string */
arr2[i] = new char[strlen(arr1[i])+1];
/* Copy contents */
strcpy(arr2[i], arr1[i]);
}
return arr2;
}
Later you have to deallocate arr2 this way:
void DeallocateArr2(char **arr2, int size)
{
for (int i=0; i<size; i++) {
delete arr2[i];
}
delete arr2;
}
I can only shake my head about the sorry state of C++ education. We have a looong way to go there. But since that’s apparently a given, what’s the best you can do?
To copy a C-style data structure like that you have know two things at the point of copy. Both are not inherently provided by a C-style array, so you’ll have to track them explicitely.
The capacity of arr1: 20. If that’s not a compile time constant you have to store it and pass it around. Since you want to implement a copy ctor that means storing the capacity in a non-static member variable of the object.
The number of used indexes in arr1: 2. Same as above. Alternatively make sure that all unused indexes are set to nullptr.
Now you can allocate an arr2 of the correct size and then allocate+memcpy all used indexes.
However, your program will go up in flames regardless, because arr1 and arr2 cannot be treated the same, even though they look identical. The used indexes of arr1 must never ever be deleted because they contain pointers to character literals: They were never newd and live in read-only memory. On the other hand you absolutely must delete the indexes of arr2, because they were newd.
If this brutal disregard of const is really required by the assignment I’d go one step further. I’d introduce another member variable, an array of booleans that tracks which indexes of the char array point to char literals and which were dynamically allocated. During copy you now have all the necessary information to either memcpy or simply set the pointer. Crazy? Definitely, but the whole assignment is, and that way the craziness is visible at least instead of hidden behind an innocent-looking C-style cast. Btw: those should be const_cast<char*> to make it clear what’s going on.
Just take a look at http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/copy, the deep copy is made by
*d_first++ = *first++;
I apologise if I'm completely misunderstanding C++ at the moment, so my question might be quite simple to solve. I'm trying to pass a character array into a function by value, create a new array of the same size and fill it with certain elements, and return that array from the function. This is the code I have so far:
char *breedMutation(char genome []){
size_t genes = sizeof(genome);
char * mutation = new char[genes];
for (size_t a = 0 ;a < genes; a++) {
mutation[a] = 'b';
}
return mutation;
}
The for loop is what updates the new array; right now, it's just dummy code, but hopefully the idea of the function is clear. When I call this function in main, however, I get an error of initializer fails to determine size of ‘mutation’. This is the code I have in main:
int main()
{
char target [] = "Das weisse leid"; //dummy message
char mutation [] = breedMutation(target);
return 0;
}
I need to learn more about pointers and character arrays, which I realise, but I'm trying to learn by example as well.
EDIT: This code, which I'm trying to modify for character arrays, is the basis for breedMutation.
int *f(size_t s){
int *ret=new int[s];
for (size_t a=0;a<s;a++)
ret[a]=a;
return ret;
}
Your error is because you can't declare mutation as a char[] and assign it the value of the char* being returned by breedMutation. If you want to do that, mutation should be declared as a char* and then deleted once you're done with it to avoid memory leaks in a real application.
Your breedMutation function, apart from dynamically allocating an array and returning it, is nothing like f. f simply creates an array of size s and fills each index in the array incrementally starting at 0. breedMutation would just fill the array with 'b' if you didn't have a logic error.
That error is that sizeof(genome); will return the size of a char*, which is generally 4 or 8 bytes on a common machine. You'll need to pass the size in as f does since arrays are demoted to pointers when passed to a function. However, with that snippet I don't see why you'd need to pass a char genome[] at all.
Also, in C++ you're better off using a container such as an std::vector or even std::array as opposed to dynamically allocated arrays (ones where you use new to create them) so that you don't have to worry about freeing them or keeping track of their size. In this case, std::string would be a good idea since it looks like you're trying to work with strings.
If you explain what exactly you're trying to do it might help us tell you how to go about your problem.
The line:
size_t genes = sizeof(genome);
will return the sizeof(char*) and not the number of elements in the genome array. You will need to pass the number of elements to the breedMutation() function:
breedMutation(target, strlen(target));
or find some other way of providing that information to the function.
Hope that helps.
EDIT: assuming it is the number of the elements in genome that you actually want.
Array are very limited.
Prefer to use std::vector (or std::string)
std::string breedMutation(std::string const& genome)
{
std::string mutation;
return mutation;
}
int main()
{
std::string target = "Das weisse leid"; //dummy message
std::string mutation = breedMutation(target);
}
Try replacing the second line of main() with:
char* mutation = breedMutation(target);
Also, don't forget to delete your mutation variable at the end.
struct Test
{
int var;
char *arr;
}
int main()
{
Test a;
a.arr = new char[50];
}
The above code would create a dynamic array in the structure but the dynamic array would not be actually memory allocated within the structure, its memory would be allocated somewhere else. I want this array to be allocated in the structure as with the fixed array but I don't want to use fixed array. Any ideas?
I've tried my best to clarify my question, hope you understand.
I want to send this structure through UDP and UDP takes continues memory buffer to send that's why I want this structure to have continuous memory.
You can not do that as the new memory is from heap/ free store and your a will be allocated on stack....
you can allocate using malloc/new a continous memory block of sizeof Test + your required size and make the pointer arr to point at the end of the Test structure.
If you need it in function scope on stack you can use alloca.
Test *a = (Test*)alloca(sizeof(Test)+yoursize);
a->arr = (char*)a+sizeof(Test)...
No you cannot have variable length arrays in C++.
So you cannot do that.
You can have a fixed length array or you can use the approach you have given.
Another approach is,
You can use placement new to place your array at an pre-allocated memory location. This memory could be on stack.
Your code don't compile. You should compile it with all warnings enabled, and improve it till you got no warnings. And are your studying C or C++? If it is C++, consider using std::vector
struct Test {
int var;
char arr[1];
};
int main()
{
std::vector<char> buf;
buf.resize(sizeof(Test) + 50);
Test *foo = reinterpret_cast<Test *>(&buf[0]);
foo->arr[40] = 'b';
}
You can pass array size to structs constructor and allocate memory for array there. Don't forget to deallocate it somewhere, e.g. in destructor:
struct Test
{
int m_var;
char *arr;
public:
Test(int var) : m_var(var)
{
arr = new char[m_var];
}
~Test()
{
delete[] arr;
arr = 0;
}
};
void main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
Test t(50);
return 0;
}
Although it hasn't been "blessed" like it has in C, most compilers will still let you use the "struct hack":
struct variable_array {
size_t size;
char data[1];
};
The "trick" is that when you allocate it, you allocate enough space for the data you want to store (but this means it must be dynamically allocated):
variable_array *a = (variable_array *) ::operator new(sizeof(*a) + data_size);
a->size = data_size;
In theory, this isn't required to work -- the compiler could do a bound-check on references to the data member to ensure you don't index beyond the one element you've defined it to hold in the struct definition. In reality, I don't know of a single compiler that does such a thing, and kind of doubt that such a thing exists. Quite a lot of C code has done things like this for years, so a compiler that did such a check just wouldn't work with a lot of real-world code, even though the standard allows it. C99 also adds this (with minutely different syntax) as an official feature of the language.
Bottom line: it's a bit clumsy, but the possibility of really not working is almost entirely theoretical.
Not truly dynamic allocation, but might solve your problem (depends on if you always know the desired size of the array at compile time)
template <size_t ArraySize>
struct Test
{
int var;
char arr[ArraySize];
}
int main()
{
Test<50> a;
}
This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Returning local data from functions in C and C++ via pointer
I need to create a function with no arguments that returns an array
I get the error: "warning: function returns address of local variable"
my code has been simplified for ease of reading
int * getNums()
{
int nums[8];
nums = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8};
return nums;
}
I am led understand that when the function ends the pointer is lost, but will the array still be sent? If not, what is a good way to return this integer array with no arguments in the function call?
Appreciate the help in advance!
Cheers
No, the array will not be "sent". You need to do one of these:
create the array dynamically using new
create the array statically
pass the array into the function as a pointer
use std::vector
In most cases, the last is the preferred solution.
Pretend you don't know what C-arrays are and join the world of modern C++:
#include <array>
std::array<int, 8> getNums()
{
std::array<int, 8> ret = {{ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 }};
return ret;
}
If your compiler is too old to provide a std:: or std::tr1:: implementation of array<>, consider using boost::array<> instead. Or, consider using std::vector<> either way.
I am led understand that when the function ends the pointer is lost, but will the array still be sent?
The behavior is undefined.
what is a good way to return this integer array with no arguments in the function call?
int nums[8];
num is local variable which resides on stack. You cannot return the reference of a local variable. Instead alloc nums with operator new and remember to delete[] it.
int* getNums()
{
int *nums = new int[8] ;
// .....
return nums ;
}
// You should deallocate the resources nums acquired through delete[] later,
// else memory leak prevails.
Whenever a function exits all the local variables created within that function get trashed.
You are creating an array local to the function and then returning a pointer to the array. The returned pointer will point to an memory location which is already reclaimed by the OS. So it wont work for you.
Instead of Arrays, You should use vectors, since it is C++
You can't return a simple array in C++. Try
int *getNums()
{
int *nums = new int[8];
...
return nums;
}
Now nums is a pointer to a heap array which will live on after getNums returns.
int* getNums()
{
static int nums[8];
nums = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8};
return nums;
}
It should propabally work now :)
Your array is a regular stack-based local variable. That means that it disappears when you return from the function and returning a pointer to it does not work. You have to make the array live longer, which can be done by turning it into a static variable or allocating it on the heap:
int *getArray {
static int foo[] = {…};
return foo;
}
int *getArray {
int foo[] = calloc(numberOfItems, sizeof(int));
foo = …;
return foo;
}
Both solutions have implications that you should understand before you use one. Namely, the static allocation (first option) is mainly a curiosity nowaydays, since it creates a sort of a global variable and causes more problems than it solves. The heap-allocated array is quite common, but it’s more customary to pass the pointer to fill using an argument to make the interface more explicit. In every case the caller is responsible for freeing the allocated memory later.
And, as others note, there are even better solutions specific to C++, if you don’t insist on using a plain C array.
I have a struc like this:
struct process {int PID;int myMemory[];};
however, when I try to use it
process p;
int memory[2];
p.myMemory = memory;
I get an criptic error from eclipse saying int[0] is not compatible with int[2];
what am i doing wrong?
Thanks!
Don't use static arrays, malloc, or even new if you're using C++. Use std::vector which will ensure correct memory management.
#include <vector>
struct Process {
int pid;
std::vector<int> myMemory;
};
Process p;
p.reserve(2); // allocates enough space on the heap to store 2 ints
p.myMemory.push_back( 4815 ); // add an index-zero element of 4815
p.myMemory.push_back( 162342 ); // add an index-one element of 162342
I might also suggest creating a constructor so that pid does not initially have an undefined value:
struct Process {
Process() : pid(-1), myMemory() {
}
int pid;
std::vector<int> myMemory;
};
I think you should declare myMemory as an int* then malloc() when you know the size of it. After this it can be used like a normal array. Int[0] seems to mean "array with no dimension specified".
EXAMPLE:
int *a; // suppose you'd like to have an array with user specified length
// get dimension (int d)
a = (int *) malloc(d * sizeof(int));
// now you can forget a is a pointer:
a[0] = 5;
a[2] = 1;
free((void *) a); // don't forget this!
All these answers about vector or whatever are confused :) using a dynamically allocated pointer opens up a memory management problem, using vector opens up a performance problem as well as making the data type a non-POD and also preventing memcpy() working.
The right answer is to use
Array<int,2>
where Array is a template the C++ committee didn't bother to put in C++99 but which is in C++0x (although I'm not sure of the name). This is an inline (no memory management or performance issues) first class array which is a wrapper around a C array. I guess Boost has something already.
In C++, array definition is almost equal to pointer constants, meaning that their address cannot be changed, while the values which they point to can be changed. That said, you cannot copy elements of an array into another by the assignment operator. You have to go through the arrays and copy the elements one by one and check for the boundary conditions yourself.
The syntax ...
struct process {int PID;int myMemory[];};
... is not valid C++, but it may be accepted by some compilers as a language extension. In particular, as I recall g++ accepts it. It's in support for the C "struct hack", which is unnecessary in C++.
In C++, if you want a variable length array in a struct, use std::vector or some other array-like class, like
#include <vector>
struct Process
{
int pid;
std::vector<int> memory;
};
By the way, it's a good idea to reserve use of UPPERCASE IDENTIFIERS for macros, so as to reduce the probability of name collisions with macros, and not make people reading the code deaf (it's shouting).
Cheers & hth.,
You cannot make the array (defined using []) to point to another array. Because the array identifier is a const pointer. You can change the value pointed by the pointer but you cannot change the pointer itself. Think of "int array[]" as "int* const array".
The only time you can do that is during initialization.
// OK
int array[] = {1, 2, 3};
// NOT OK
int array[];
array = [1, 2, 3]; // this is no good.
int x[] is normally understood as int * x.
In this case, it is not, so if you want a vector of integers of an undetermined number of positions, change your declaration to:
struct process {int PID;int * myMemory;};
You should change your initialization to:
int memory[2];
p.myMemory = new int[ 10 ];