Why this is not allowed?
#include <cstdio>
struct Foo {
int fooId;
char arr[ ];
} fooList[] =
{ {1, {'a', 'b'}},
{2, {'c', 'd'}}
};
int main()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++)
printf("%d %c\n", fooList[i].fooId, fooList[i].arr[0]);
}
whereas, this is allowed:
struct Foo {
int fooId;
char arr[2]; // this line modified
} fooList[] =
{ {1, {'a', 'b'}},
{2, {'c', 'd'}}
};
Only the last member of a C struct can be flexible as in arr[].
Shamelessly copying from paragraph 6.7.2.1, sub-paragraph 16 of the ISO C99 standard:
16 As a special case, the last element
of a structure with more than one
named member may have an incomplete
array type; this is called a flexible
array member. With two exceptions,
the flexible array member is ignored.
First, the size of the structure shall
be equal to the offset of the last
element of an otherwise identical
structure that replaces the flexible
array member with an array of
unspecified length.106)...
EDIT:
As for C++, see this. Bottom-line: flexible array members are not allowed in C++ at all - at least for the time being.
In C++ all members of an user defined type must have complete types, and the member arr does not have a complete type unless you give it a size.
In C, the struct definition would compile, but you might not get what you want. The problem is that an array without size is allowed at the end of a struct to be used as a proxy to access the contiguous block of memory after the instance. This allows a dumb vector implementation as:
typedef struct vector {
int size;
char buffer[];
} vector;
vector* create_vector( int size ) {
vector* p = (vector*) malloc( sizeof *p + size ); // manually allocate "size" extra
p->size = size;
};
int main() {
vector* v = create_vector(10);
for ( int i = 0; i < v->size; ++i )
printf("%d\n", v->buffer[i] );
free(v);
}
But the language does not allow you to initialize with the curly braces as the compiler does not know how much memory has to be held (in general, in some circumstances it can know). The size-less member of the struct is only a way of accessing beyond the end of the object, it does not hold memory in itself:
printf( "sizeof(vector)=%d\n", sizeof(vector) ); // == sizeof(int)
In C++03, this is not allowed in struct or class!
Comeau C++ compiler gives this error:
"ComeauTest.c", line 3: error:
incomplete type is not allowed
char arr[ ];
^
Exactly simlar question yesterday : Difference between int* and int[] in C++
Related
I received lecture slides for C++ that merely mention these without explaining what they mean and what are their differences:
int (*arr)[]={...};
int *(arr[])={...};
int (&arr)[]={...};
int &(arr[])={...}; // not allowed?
What do each of these mean? I tried running a program with some of these, but I'm getting errors because I don't know what to put in the initialization list.
int (*arr)[] = { ... };
This is not an array at all. This is a pointer to an array of unknown size. Note that this a scalar type. It is just a data pointer, no different in nature from any other data pointer. Which means that the only way to use { ... } initializer with it is to specify a single value of proper type inside the { ... }. E.g.
int (*arr)[] = { nullptr };
which is the same as
int (*arr)[] = nullptr;
int *(arr[]) = { ... };
This is indeed an array. The same thing can be expressed as
int *arr[] = { ... };
This is an array of int * pointers. It size will depend on how many initializers are supplied in { ... }. E.g.
int *arr[] = { nullptr, &some_int, &some_other_int };
declares arr as an array of 3 pointers of type int *.
int (&arr)[] = { ... };
This is not an array per se. This is a reference to an array of unknown size. Again, the only legal { ... } initializer in this case would be just one lvalue of type int [] inside the { ... }. If the array was declared const, you'd be able to attach it to a temporary array of ints using this syntax, e.g.
const int (&arr)[] = { 1, 2, 3 };
But without const it is not possible. (I have my doubts about the legality of this even with const though. GCC accepts it.)
int &(arr[]) = { ... };
This is an attempt to declare an array of references. Not allowed.
You need to use the Clockwise/Spiral Rule.
int (*arr)[]={...}; // pointer to array of int
int *(arr[])={...}; // array of int pointers
int (&arr)[]={...}; // a reference to an array of int
int &(arr[])={...}; // an array of int references
The last one though is illegal: Why arrays of references are illegal?
I want to do something like this below:
int main() {
int a[10];
int *d = generateArrayOfSize(10) // This generates an array of size 10 on the heap
a = d;
print(a); // Prints the first 10 elements of array.
}
However above code gives compilation error (incompatible types in assignment of ‘int*’ to ‘int [10]’).
What can I do to make the above code to work?
Arrays are non-assignable and non-copyable, so you'd have to copy each element by hand (in a loop), or using std::copy.
If you're using C++, then use C++ arrays rather than C style arrays and pointers. Here's an example
#include <array>
#include <iostream>
template<size_t N>
std::array<int, N> generateArrayOfSize(void)
{
std::array<int, N> a;
for (int n=0; n<N; ++n)
a[n] = n;
return a;
}
template<size_t N>
void print(std::array<int, N> const &a)
{
for (auto num : a)
std::cout << num << " ";
}
int main() {
std::array<int, 10> a;
std::array<int, 10> d = generateArrayOfSize<10>();
a = d;
print(a); // Prints the first 10 elements of array.
}
which outputs 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Arrays are not pointers.
You can't do :
int a[10];
int *d;
a = d;
Change it to :
int *a;
int *d;
a = d;
Main differences between arrays and pointers in C programming :
Pointer | Array
-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------
A pointer is a place in memory that keeps | An array is a single, pre allocated chunk
address of another place inside | of contiguous elements (all of the same
| type), fixed in size and location.
-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------
A pointer can point to a dynamically | They are static in nature. Once memory is
allocated memory. In this case, the memory | allocated , it cannot be resized or freed
allocation can be resized or freed later. | dynamically.
-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------
You have a quite good explanation here : https://stackoverflow.com/a/7725410/1394283
An array is not a pointer (although a name of an array often decays to a pointer to its first element).
To make the above code to work, you can declare a as a pointer: int *a;. The print function takes an int* (or a decayed array) anyway.
If you really want to have two arrays and copy contents from one array to another, you should copy the data in a loop.
This will print in this way when you assign a string reference to a pointer you have to use *ptr to print the value of a pointer otherwise in your case print(d) that is like cout< in c++ it will only print the location of the d[0].
int ary[5]={1,2,3,4,5};
int *d;
d=ary;
for(int i=0;i<5;i++)
cout<<*(d+i);
Because array names are non-modifiable. So you can't do
a = d;
Declare it as a pointer like this:
int *a;
Little rusty with my C++ but try something like this.
int main() {
int *a;
int *d = generateArrayOfSize(10) // This generates an array of size 10 on the heap
a = d;
print(a); // Prints the first 10 elements of array.
}
In C, it was always true when Thing X[10]; was declared, X was the constant address of the first element(i.e. &X[0]). So you could then say:
Thing *Y = X; // Equivalent to (Thing *Y = &X[0];)
But in C++, the compiler "remembers" that the Thing array X has 10 elements, and some C++ imposed type checking rules break. Imagine we add Thing Z[20]; to the discussion.
Thing *Y = X; and Thing *Y = Z; if both allowed, would imply that a single variable could be set to Thing Arrays of length 10 and 20, which are very different (ahem) "things", as a quick look at a 2D array will reveal. This sort of justifies why the C language assumed equivalent of X and &X[0] is broken in C++.
Well, at least for some versions of C++. So best not to assume it, and use
Thing *Y = &x[0]; and Thing *Y = &Z[0] instead;
This approach has two advantages. It does what is wanted, and it actually compiles. :-)
Question is make an array of 10 integers that's fine
int array[10];
Now question is
how to make a reference to an array which I have declared above ?
I tried this
int &ra = a;
But it's giving me error...
Please provide me details about this error and how to make reference of an array.
int (&ra)[10] = a;
Alternatively, you can use a typedef to separate this into the type for "array of 10 ints" and having a reference there-to, as in:
typedef int int10[10];
int10& my_ref = a;
The problem with your int &ra = a; is that it tells the compiler to create a reference of type int that refers to an array of 10 ints... they're just not the same thing. Consider that sizeof(int) is a tenth of the size of an array of ten ints - they occupy different amounts of memory. What you've asked for with the reference's type could be satisfied by a particular integer, as in int& ra = a[0];.
I appreciate it's a bit confusing that int* p = a; is allowed - for compatibility with the less type-safe C, pointers can be used to access single elements or arrays, despite not preserving any information about the array size. That's one reason to prefer references - they add a little safety and functionality over pointers.
For examples of increased functionality, you can take sizeof my_ref and get the number of bytes in the int array (10 * sizeof(int)), whereas sizeof p would give you the size of the pointer (sizeof(int*)) and sizeof *p == sizeof(int). And you can have code like this that "captures" the array dimension for use within a function:
template <int N>
void f(int (&x)[N])
{
std::cout << "I know this array has " << N << " elements\n";
}
The reference to array will have type int (&a)[10].
int array[10];
int (&a)[10] = array;
Sometimes it might be useful to simplify things a little bit using typedef
typedef int (&ArrayRef)[10];
...
ArrayRef a = array;
This is a reference to an array of of ints of size 10:
int (&ra)[10];
so
int (&ra)[10] = a;
You can typedef the array type (the type should not be incomplete) as follow:
#define LEN 10
typedef int (array)[LEN];
int main(void)
{
array arr = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}; //define int arr[10] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
array arr2; //declare int arr[10];
array *arrptr = &arr; // pointer to array: int (*arrptr)[10] = &arr;
array &&arrvef; // declare rvalue reference to array of 10 ints
array &ref = arr; // define reference to arr: int (&ref)[10] = arr;
}
In boost/utility/swap.hpp I have found this piece of code:
template<class T, std::size_t N>
void swap_impl(T (& left)[N], T (& right)[N])
{
for (std::size_t i = 0; i < N; ++i)
{
::boost_swap_impl::swap_impl(left[i], right[i]);
}
}
What are left and right? Are they references to arrays? Is this code allowed by C++ ISO standard 2003 or later?
A reference to an array of type T and length N.
This is a natural extension of C's pointer-to-array syntax, and is supported by C++03.
You could use cdecl.org to try to parse these complex type declarations.
What are left and right? Are they references to arrays? Is this code allowed by C++ ISO standard 2003 or later?
Yes. They're references to arrays.
That means, you can call swap_impl as:
int a[10]; //array
int b[10];
//...
swap_impl(a,b); //correct
But you cannot call swap_impl as:
int *a = new int[10]; //pointer
int *b = new int[10];
//...
swap_impl(a,b); //compilation error
Also note that you cannot do even this:
int a[10];
int b[11];
//...
swap_impl(a,b); //compilation error - a and b are arrays of different size!
Important point:
- Not only arguments must be arrays, but the arrays must be of same size!
This is the way to declare a reference to an array of T (of size N) named left and right. The code is legal C++.
This allows you to pass in:
int ones[5] = { 1,1,1,1,1 };
int twos[5] = { 2,2,2,2,2 };
swap_impl(ones, twos);
Then template type inference will know that you have T = int and N = 5 and do the in-place swap. If you mismatch the types or the size, you get a handy compilation failure.
Yes this is standard C++ allowed from very early on (its basically C with the addition of a reference).
Using typedefs makes it easier to read:
int main()
{
typedef int (&MyArray)[4];
int data[4];
MyArray dataRef = data;
}
It sort of mirrors the function typedef
typedef int (*MyFunc)();
This question already has answers here:
How do I find the length of an array?
(30 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I have
int list[] = {1, 2, 3};
How to I get the size of list?
I know that for a char array, we can use strlen(array) to find the size, or check with '\0' at the end of the array.
I tried sizeof(array) / sizeof(array[0]) as some answers said, but it only works in main? For example:
int size(int arr1[]){
return sizeof(arr1) / sizeof(arr1[0]);
}
int main() {
int list[] = {1, 2, 3};
int size1 = sizeof(list) / sizeof(list[0]); // ok
int size2 = size(list_1); // no
// size1 and size2 are not the same
}
Why?
Try this:
sizeof(list) / sizeof(list[0]);
Because this question is tagged C++, it is always recommended to use std::vector in C++ rather than using conventional C-style arrays.
An array-type is implicitly converted into a pointer-type when you pass it to a function.
Have a look at this.
In order to correctly print the sizeof an array inside any function, pass the array by reference to that function (but you need to know the size of that array in advance).
You would do it like so for the general case
template<typename T,int N>
//template argument deduction
int size(T (&arr1)[N]) //Passing the array by reference
{
return sizeof(arr1)/sizeof(arr1[0]); //Correctly returns the size of 'list'
// or
return N; //Correctly returns the size too [cool trick ;-)]
}
The "standard" C way to do this is
sizeof(list) / sizeof(list[0])
You could use boost::size, which is basically defined this way:
template <typename T, std::size_t N>
std::size_t size(T const (&)[N])
{
return N;
}
Note that if you want to use the size as a constant expression, you'll either have to use the sizeof a / sizeof a[0] idiom or wait for the next version of the C++ standard.
You can't do that for a dynamically allocated array (or a pointer). For static arrays, you can use sizeof(array) to get the whole array size in bytes and divide it by the size of each element:
#define COUNTOF(x) (sizeof(x)/sizeof(*x))
To get the size of a dynamic array, you have to keep track of it manually and pass it around with it, or terminate it with a sentinel value (like '\0' in null terminated strings).
Update: I realized that your question is tagged C++ and not C. You should definitely consider using std::vector instead of arrays in C++ if you want to pass things around:
std::vector<int> v;
v.push_back(1);
v.push_back(2);
std::cout << v.size() << std::endl; // prints 2
Since you've marked this as C++, it's worth mentioning that there is a somewhat better way than the C-style macro:
template <class T, size_t N>
size_t countof(const T &array[N]) { return N; }
This has the advantage that if you accidentally try to pass something other than an array to it, the code simply won't compile (whereas passing a pointer to the C macro will compile but produce a bad result. The disadvantage is that this doesn't give you a compile-time constant, so you can't do something like this:
int a[20];
char x[countof(a)];
In C++11 or newer, you can add constexpr to get a compile-time constant:
template <class T, size_t N>
constexpr size_t countof(const T &array[N]) { return N; }
If you really want to support the same on older compilers, there is a way, originally invented by Ivan Johnson, AFAIK:
#define COUNTOF(x) ( \
0 * sizeof( reinterpret_cast<const ::Bad_arg_to_COUNTOF*>(x) ) + \
0 * sizeof( ::Bad_arg_to_COUNTOF::check_type((x), &(x)) ) + \
sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0]) )
class Bad_arg_to_COUNTOF
{
public:
class Is_pointer;
class Is_array {};
template<typename T>
static Is_pointer check_type(const T*, const T* const*);
static Is_array check_type(const void*, const void*);
};
This uses sizeof(x)/sizeof(x[0]) to compute the size, just like the C macro does, so it gives a compile-time constant. The difference is that it first uses some template magic to cause a compile error if what you've passed isn't the name of an array. It does that by overloading check_type to return an incomplete type for a pointer, but a complete type for an array. Then (the really tricky part) it doesn't actually call that function at all -- it just takes the size of the type the function would return, which is zero for the overload that returns the complete type, but not allowed (forcing a compile error) for the incomplete type.
IMO, that's a pretty cool example of template meta programming -- though in all honesty, the result is kind of pointless. You really only need that size as a compile time constant if you're using arrays, which you should normally avoid in any case. Using std::vector, it's fine to supply the size at run-time (and resize the vector when/if needed).
Besides Carl's answer, the "standard" C++ way is not to use a C int array, but rather something like a C++ STL std::vector<int> list which you can query for list.size().
when u pass any array to some function. u are just passing it's starting address, so for it to work u have to pass it size also for it to work properly. it's the same reason why we pass argc with argv[] in command line arguement.
You can make a template function, and pass the array by reference to achieve this.
Here is my code snippet
template <typename TypeOfData>
void PrintArray(TypeOfData &arrayOfType);
int main()
{
char charArray[] = "my name is";
int intArray[] = { 1,2,3,4,5,6 };
double doubleArray[] = { 1.1,2.2,3.3 };
PrintArray(charArray);
PrintArray(intArray);
PrintArray(doubleArray);
}
template <typename TypeOfData>
void PrintArray(TypeOfData &arrayOfType)
{
int elementsCount = sizeof(arrayOfType) / sizeof(arrayOfType[0]);
for (int i = 0; i < elementsCount; i++)
{
cout << "Value in elements at position " << i + 1 << " is " << arrayOfType[i] << endl;
}
}
You have to use sizeof() function.
Code Snippet:
#include<bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
ios::sync_with_stdio(false);
int arr[] ={5, 3, 6, 7};
int size = sizeof(arr) / sizeof(arr[0]);
cout<<size<<endl;
return 0;
}
int arr1[] = {8, 15, 3, 7};
int n = sizeof(arr1)/sizeof(arr1[0]);
So basically sizeof(arr1) is giving the size of the object being pointed to, each element maybe occupying multiple bits so dividing by the number of bits per element (sizeof(arr1[0]) gives you the actual number of elements you're looking for, i.e. 4 in my example.
This method work when you are using a class: In this example you will receive a array, so the only method that worked for me was these one:
template <typename T, size_t n, size_t m>
Matrix& operator= (T (&a)[n][m])
{
int arows = n;
int acols = m;
p = new double*[arows];
for (register int r = 0; r < arows; r++)
{
p[r] = new double[acols];
for (register int c = 0; c < acols; c++)
{
p[r][c] = a[r][c]; //A[rows][columns]
}
}
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/how-to-print-size-of-an-array-in-a-function-in-c/
Assuming you merely want to know the size of an array whose type you know (int) but whose size, obviously, you don't know, it is suitable to verify whether the array is empty, otherwise you will end up with a division by zero (causing a Float point exception).
int array_size(int array[]) {
if(sizeof(array) == 0) {
return 0;
}
return sizeof(array)/sizeof(array[0]);
}
If you want to know how much numbers the array have, you want to know the array length. The function sizeof(var) in C gives you the bytes in the computer memory. So if you know the memory the int occupy you can do like this:
int arraylength(int array[]) {
return sizeof(array) / sizeof(int); // Size of the Array divided by the int size
}