C++ is real handy in most projects, but sometimes you just have to integrate with existing C style functions.
How do you do that in a neat way, especially, if you work with strings?
I had an idea that I could use construct like this:
std::string buffer;
buffer.resize(1024);
GetBackCStyleString(&buffer[0], 1024);
But this causes problems with string length, as it returns the resized length. Is there a better way to integrate C functions in C++ code?
That's a good solution. If you want the size to be accurate, call resize again after the function returns and you can calculate the actual length.
e.g.
buffer.resize(GetBackCStyleString(&buffer[0], buffer.size());
if the function returns the length, or
GetBackCStyleString(&buffer[0], buffer.size()
buffer.resize(strlen(&buffer[0]));
otherwise.
buffer.c_str() if function takes const char* or const_cast<char*>(buffer.c_str()) if function takes char*. In the latter case be cautious
Create a plain char somebuf[somesize]; buffer and let the C function write into that.
Then create a std::string from it using std::string buffer(somebuf).
If the function just wants a const char * (i.e. an "input" parameter), simply pass yourStdString.c_str() to it.
Related
Is it possible to somehow adapt a c-style string/buffer (char* or wchar_t*) to work with the Boost String Algorithms Library?
That is, for example, it's trimalgorithm has the following declaration:
template<typename SequenceT>
void trim(SequenceT &, const std::locale & = std::locale());
and the implementation (look for trim_left_if) requires that the sequence type has a member function erase.
How could I use that with a raw character pointer / c string buffer?
char* pStr = getSomeCString(); // example, could also be something like wchar_t buf[256];
...
boost::trim(pStr); // HOW?
Ideally, the algorithms would work directly on the supplied buffer. (As far as possible. it obviously can't work if an algorithm needs to allocate additional space in the "string".)
#Vitaly asks: why can't you create a std::string from char buffer and then use it in algorithms?
The reason I have char* at all is that I'd like to use a few algorthims on our existing codebase. Refactoring all the char buffers to string would be more work than it's worth, and when changing or adapting something it would be nice to just be able to apply a given algorithm to any c-style string that happens to live in the current code.
Using a string would mean to (a) copy char* to string, (b) apply algorithm to string and (c) copy string back into char buffer.
For the SequenceT-type operations, you probably have to use std::string. If you wanted to implement that by yourself, you'd have to fulfill many more requirements for creation, destruction, value semantics etc. You'd basically end up with your implementation of std::string.
The RangeT-type operations might be, however, usable on char*s using the iterator_range from Boost.Range library. I didn't try it, though.
There exist some code which implements a std::string like string with a fixed buffer. With some tinkering you can modify this code to create a string type which uses an external buffer:
char buffer[100];
strcpy(buffer, " HELLO ");
xstr::xstring<xstr::fixed_char_buf<char> >
str(buffer, strlen(buffer), sizeof(buffer));
boost::algorithm::trim(str);
buffer[str.size()] = 0;
std::cout << buffer << std::endl; // prints "HELLO"
For this I added an constructor to xstr::xstring and xstr::fixed_char_buf to take the buffer, the size of the buffer which is in use and the maximum size of the buffer. Further I replaced the SIZE template argument with a member variable and changed the internal char array into a char pointer.
The xstr code is a bit old and will not compile without trouble on newer compilers but it needs some minor changes. Further I only added the things needed in this case. If you want to use this for real, you need to make some more changes to make sure it can not use uninitialized memory.
Anyway, it might be a good start for writing you own string adapter.
I don't know what platform you're targeting, but on most modern computers (including mobile ones like ARM) memory copy is so fast you shouldn't even waste your time optimizing memory copies. I say - wrap char* in std::string and check whether the performance suits your needs. Don't waste time on premature optimization.
Is there a way to get the "raw" buffer o a std::string?
I'm thinking of something similar to CString::GetBuffer(). For example, with CString I would do:
CString myPath;
::GetCurrentDirectory(MAX_PATH+1, myPath.GetBuffer(MAX_PATH));
myPath.ReleaseBuffer();
So, does std::string have something similar?
While a bit unorthodox, it's perfectly valid to use std::string as a linear memory buffer, the only caveat is that it isn't supported by the standard until C++11 that is.
std::string s;
char* s_ptr = &s[0]; // get at the buffer
To quote Herb Sutter,
Every std::string implementation I know of is in fact contiguous and null-terminates its buffer. So, although it isn’t formally
guaranteed, in practice you can probably get away with calling &str[0]
to get a pointer to a contiguous and null-terminated string. (But to
be safe, you should still use str.c_str().)
"Probably" is key here. So, while it's not a guarantee, you should be able to rely on the principle that std::string is a linear memory buffer and you should assert facts about this in your test suite, just to be sure.
You can always build your own buffer class but when you're looking to buy, this is what the STL has to offer.
Use std::vector<char> if you want a real buffer.
#include <vector>
#include <string>
int main(){
std::vector<char> buff(MAX_PATH+1);
::GetCurrentDirectory(MAX_PATH+1, &buff[0]);
std::string path(buff.begin(), buff.end());
}
Example on Ideone.
Not portably, no. The standard does not guarantee that std::strings have an exclusive linear representation in memory (and with the old C++03 standard, even data-structures like ropes are permitted), so the API does not give you access to it. They must be able to change their internal representation to that (in C++03) or give access to their linear representation (if they have one, which is enforced in C++11), but only for reading. You can access this using data() and/or c_str(). Because of that, the interface still supports copy-on-write.
The usual recommendation for working with C-APIs that modify arrays by accessing through pointers is to use an std::vector, which is guaranteed to have a linear memory-representation exactly for this purpose.
To sum this up: if you want to do this portably and if you want your string to end up in an std::string, you have no choice but to copy the result into the string.
It has c_str, which on all C++ implementations that I know returns the underlying buffer (but as a const char *, so you can't modify it).
std::string str("Hello world");
LPCSTR sz = str.c_str();
Keep in mind that sz will be invalidated when str is reallocated or goes out of scope. You could do something like this to decouple from the string:
std::vector<char> buf(str.begin(), str.end()); // not null terminated
buf.push_back(0); // null terminated
Or, in oldfashioned C style (note that this will not allow strings with embedded null-characters):
#include <cstring>
char* sz = strdup(str.c_str());
// ... use sz
free(sz);
According to this MSDN article, I think this is the best approach for what you want to do using std::wstring directly. Second best is std::unique_ptr<wchar_t[]> and third best is using std::vector<wchar_t>. Feel free to read the article and draw you own conclusions.
// Get the length of the text string
// (Note: +1 to consider the terminating NUL)
const int bufferLength = ::GetWindowTextLength(hWnd) + 1;
// Allocate string of proper size
std::wstring text;
text.resize(bufferLength);
// Get the text of the specified control
// Note that the address of the internal string buffer
// can be obtained with the &text[0] syntax
::GetWindowText(hWnd, &text[0], bufferLength);
// Resize down the string to avoid bogus double-NUL-terminated strings
text.resize(bufferLength - 1);
I think you will be frowned upon by the purists of STD cult for doing this. In any case, its much better to not relay on bloated and generic standard library if you want dynamic string type that can be easily passed to low level API functions that will modify its buffer and size at the same time, without any conversions, than you will have to implement it! Its actually very challenging and interesting task to do. For example in my custom txt type I overload this operators:
ui64 operator~() const; // Size operator
uli32 * operator*(); // Size modification operator
ui64 operator!() const; // True Size Operator
txt& operator--(); // Trimm operator
And also this casts:
operator const char *() const;
operator char *();
And as such, i can pass txt type to low level API functions directly, without even calling any .c_str(). I can then also pass the API function it's true size (i.e. size of buffer) and also pointer to internal size variable (operator*()), so that API function can update amount of characters written, thus giving valid string without the need to call stringlength at all!
I tried to mimic basic types with this txt, so it has no public functions at all, all public interface is only via operators. This way my txt fits perfectly with ints and other fundamental types.
I have a function for writing ppm files (a picture format) to disk. It takes the filename as a char* array. In my main function, I put together a filename using a stringstream and the << operator. Then, I want to pass the results of this to my ppm function. I've seen this discussed elsewhere, often with very convoluted looking methods (many in-between conversion steps).
What I've done is shown in the code below, and the tricky part that others usually do in many steps with temp variables is (char*) (PPM_file_name.str().data()). What this accomplishes is to extract the string from stringstream PPM_file_name with .str(), then get the pointer to its actual contents with .data() (this is a const char*), then cast that to a regular (char*). More complete example below.
I've found the following to work fine so far, but it makes me uneasy because usually when other people have done something in a seemingly more convoluted way, it's because that's a safer way to do it. So, can anyone tell me if what I'm doing here is safe and also how portable is it?
Thanks.
#include <iostream>
#include <sstream>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){
// String stream to hold the file name so I can create it from a series of other variable
stringstream PPM_file_name;
// ... a bunch of other code where int ccd_num and string cur_id_str are created and initialized
// Assemble the file name
PPM_file_name << "ccd" << ccd_num << "_" << cur_id_str << ".ppm";
// From PPM_file_name, extract its string, then the const char* pointer to that string's data, then cast that to char*
write_ppm((char*)(PPM_file_name.str().data()),"ladybug_vidcapture.cpp",rgb_images[ccd_num],width,height);
return 0;
}
Thanks everyone. So, following a few peoples' suggestions here, I've done the following, since I do have control over write_ppm:
Modified write_ppm to take const char*:
void write_ppm(const char *file_name, char *comment, unsigned char *image,int width,int height)
And now I'm passing ppm_file_name as follows:
write_ppm((PPM_file_name.str().c_str()),"A comment",rgb_images[ccd_num],width,height);
Is there anything I should do here, or does that mostly clear up the issues with how this was being passed before? Should all the other char arguments to write_ppm be const as well? It's a very short function, and it doesn't appear to modify any of the arguments. Thanks.
This looks like a typical case of someone not writing const-correct code and it having the knock-on effect. You have several choices:
If write_ppm is under your control, or the control of anyone you know, get them to make it const corrct
If it is not, and you can guarantee it never changes the filename then const_cast
If you cannot guarantee that, copy your string into a std::vector plus the null terminator and pass &vec[0] (where vec represents the name of your vector variable)
You should use PPM_file_name.str().c_str(), since data() isn't guaranteed to return a null-terminated string.
Either write_ppm() should take its first argument by const char* (promising not to change the string's content) or you must not pass a string stream (because you must not change its content that way).
You shouldn't use C-style casts in C++, because they don't differentiate between different reasons to cast. Yours is casting away const, which, if at all, should be done using const_cast<>. But as a rule of thumb, const_cast<> is usually only required to make code compile that isn't const-correct, which I'd consider an error.
It's absolutely safe and portable as long as write_ppm doesn't actually change the argument, in which case it is undefined behavior. I would recommend using const_cast<char*> instead of C-style cast. Also consider using c_str() member instead of the data() member. The former guarantees to return a null-terminated string
Use c_str() instead of data() (c_str() return a NULL-terminated sequence of characters).
Why not simply use const_cast<char *>(PPM_file_name.str().c_str()) ?
How to convert AS3 ByteArray into wchar_t const* filename?
So in my C code I have a function waiting for a file with void fun (wchar_t const* filename) how to send to that function my ByteArray? (Or, how should I re-write my function?)
A four month old question. Better late than never?
To convert a ByteArray to a String in AS3, there are two ways depending on how the String was stored. Firstly, if you use writeUTF it will write an unsigned short representing the String's length first, then write out the string data. The string is easiest to recover this way. Here's how it's done in AS3:
byteArray.position = 0;
var str:String = byteArray.readUTF();
Alternatively, toString also works in this case. The second way to store is with writeUTFBytes. This won't write the length to the beginning, so you'll need to track it independantly somehow. It sounds like you want the entire ByteArray to be a single String, so you can use the ByteArray's length.
byteArray.position = 0;
var str:String = byteArray.readUTFBytes(byteArray.length);
Since you want to do this with Alchemy, you just need to convert the above code. Here's a conversion of the second example:
std::string batostr(AS3_Val byteArray) {
AS3_SetS(byteArray, "position", AS3_Int(0));
return AS3_StringValue(AS3_CallS("readUTFBytes", byteArray,
AS3_Array("AS3ValType", AS3_GetS(byteArray, "length")) ));
}
This has a ridiculous amount of memory leaks, of course, since I'm not calling AS3_Release anywhere. I use a RAII wrapper for AS3_Val in my own code... for the sake of my sanity. As should you.
Anyway, the std::string my function returns will be UTF-8 multibyte. Any standard C++ technique for converting to wide characters should work from here. (search the site for endless reposts) I suggest leaving it is as it, though. I can't think of any advantage to using wide characters on this platform.
What is the correct C++ way of comparing a memory buffer with a constant string - strcmp(buf, "sometext") ? I want to avoid unnecessary memory copying as the result of creating temporary std::string objects.
Thanks.
If you're just checking for equality, you may be able to use std::equal
#include <algorithms>
const char* text = "sometext";
const int len = 8; // length of text
if (std::equal(text, text+len, buf)) ...
of course this will need additional logic if your buffer can be smaller than the text
strcmp is good if you know the contents of your buffer. std::strncmp might give you a little more security against buffer overflows.
strcmp works fine, no copy is made. Alternatively, you could also use memcmp. However, when in C++, why not use std::strings?
I would use memcmp, and as the last parameter, use the minimum of the 2 sizes of data.
Also check to make sure those 2 sizes are the same, or else you are simply comparing the prefix of the shortest one.
You may do it like,
const char* const CONST_STRING = "sometext";
strcmp(buf,CONST_STRING);