My Code:
std::ofstream m_myfile,
m_myfile.open ("zLog.txt");
m_myfile << "Writing this to a file " << " and this " << endl;
when this C++ Program runs, I have another program that needs to read this file. The problem is that the file is locked by C++ and I cannot read it from the other program. I know there is something I have to do where I write the code someway in the C++ Program where it allows sharing. Can someone write exactly what I need. I have googled this to death and still cannot get this to work.
Some people say close the file, before the other program reads it. I cannot do this, the file needs to be open.
You need to open the file with sharing enabled. Use the following overload of the open method:
void open(const char *szName, int nMode = ios::out, int nProt = filebuf::openprot);
and pass the appropriate share mode as nProt:
filebuf::sh_compat: Compatibility share mode
filebuf::sh_none: Exclusive mode; no sharing
filebuf::sh_read: Read sharing allowed
filebuf::sh_write: Write sharing allowed
There is also an overload of the ofstream constructor that takes the same arguments.
The sharing is going to be controlled at the OS level. So you need to look at the API for your OS and figure out how to turn read-write sharing on.
Note: you still probably won't get the results you want because there will be caching and buffering issues and what you think was written to the file may not actually be there.
If you want to share information between two processes, use named pipes or sockets. Both are available on just about every OS.
Use filebuf::sh_write while opening the file.
Other option is to use sockets. Check out this stackoverflow question: Is there a way for multiple processes to share a listening socket?
Related
I am trying to delete all files in a folder, but if a file is left open, it will not delete. I need to check the folder for any open files, write their names to a text document, and then close the open files. As I don't have much experience, I am first trying to check one file in the same folder, then all in the same folder, then all in a different folder. I don't want to be to needy or demanding, so just some help with the first step would be nice.
I don't have a ton of experience coding, but I have tried using fstream and (name.is_open). I may be using them wrong, so I have not yet ruled them out.
// ifstream::is_open
#include <iostream> // std::cout
#include <fstream> // std::ifstream
void checkFiles() {
int done = 0;
while(done != 1){
std::cout << "Enter 0 for continue or 1 for done: ";
std::cin >> done;
std::ifstream ifs ("test.txt");
if (ifs.is_open()) {
// Print that file is open, then close
std::cout << "File is open\n";
std::ifstream.close():
}
else {
std::cout << "File not open\n";
}
}
For this bit of code, if the file is open, it should say "File is open."
If not, it should say "File not open"
Even if I force quit the .txt file, it still says that it is open.
Eventually, I want to have a new file that displays what files were open, as well as closing all the open files.
Standard C++ offers us the filesystem library to handle files and directories (standardized in C++17). However, checking which files are open is not - as far as I can tell - a feature of that library.
The is_open() method for std::fstream's is something completely different than what you're trying to check for: It tells you whether the particular stream object is in an open state (which would mean association with an open file) - and it doesn't use the OS to check which files are open. Typically, it's just a way to check whether you've closed it someplace else in your own program; at most, it might ensure that the OS has not unilaterally closed the OS-side file access handle. So, you won't get anywhere in that direction.
I also believe, though I'm not 100% certain, that Boost doesn't have a library which offers this capability, either. Boost's filesystem library is almost identical to std::filesystem, as the latter was based on it.
So, to the best of my knowledge, you either need to directly use operating-system-specific calls to do this, or look for a library offering this functionality, elsewhere.
If you haven't found anything else, you could track how this is currently done with what's available in userspace. There's a utility called lsof. It's available on some operating systems based on Linux, Darwin, FreeBSD and Solaris (e.g. available on MacOS). It's maintained here. The source code seems to be rather atrocious C. An intrepid developer could parse that mess, figure out what it does, extract the parts relevant for your specific use case, and refactor it into a reasonable, readable and short(ish) C++ function. I realize you (OP) might not be up for it at this point, but - maybe someone else reading this answer will get inspired to do it.
The pfiles command shows the open files for a process. You can run it for all or some processes.
However, Solaris (and UNIX) in general allows you to delete open files. The file can still be read and written while it is open (but deleted), but nobody else can open the same file and the file will be deleted when all processes have the file closed.
I wish to print some text directly to a network printer from my c++ code (I am coding with xcode 4). I do know that everything on unix is a file and believe that it would not be impossible to redirect the text using fstream method in c++ to the printer device file. The only problem is I don't know the device file in /dev associated with my network printer.
Is it possible to achieve printing using fstream method? Something like
std::fstream printFile;
printFile.open("//PATH/TO/PRINTER/DEV", std::ios::out);
printFile << "This must go to printer" << std::endl;
printFile.close();
And, if so
How to obtain the file in /dev corresponding to a particular printer?
Thanks in advance,
Nikhil
Opening and writing directly to a file used to be possible back in the days of serial printers; however, this is not the approach available today.
The CUPS daemon provides print queuing, scheduling, and administrative interfaces on OS X and many other Unix systems. You can use the lp(1) or lpr(1) commands to print files. (The different commands come from different versions of print spoolers available in Unix systems over the years; one was derived from the BSD-sources and the other derived from the AT&T sources. For compatibility, CUPS provides both programs.)
You can probably achieve something like you were after with popen(3). In shell, it'd be something like:
echo hello | lp -
The - says to print from standard input.
I haven't tested this, but the popen(3) equivalent would probably look like this:
FILE *f = popen("lp -", "w");
if (!f)
exit(1);
fprintf(f, "output to the printer");
I recommend testing some inputs at the shell first to make sure that CUPS is prepared to handle the formatting of the content you intend to send. You might need to terminate lines with CRLF rather than just \n, otherwise the printer may "stair-step" the output. Or, if you're sending PDF or PS or PCL data, it'd be worthwhile testing that in the cheapest possible manner to make sure the print system works as you expect.
I have a C++ program that creates an output file "A" with ofstream. This file is then read by some legacy C code that opens the file with _iobuf. The legacy code then creates its own output file "B" using _iobuf, and this file is then read by the C++ program using ifstream. This sequence is iterated many times, with the same file names for A and B in each iteration.
Occasionally, the C++ program cannot open the output file A for writing, and I must try several times before it succeeds. This occurs nondeterministically, and maybe once in a thousand iterations. Note that the C program never has to wait to open its input or output file, nor does the C++ program ever have to wait to open its input file. This informal observation is based on hundreds of thousands of iterations.
I'm wondering if this has something to do with mixing ofstream and _iobuf in the same program? Both the C++ code and the C code are linked into the same program. And the legacy C code is technically C++ code, but was written in a very C-like style. Is there anything I can do to eliminate this waiting to open the ofstream file? I do not want to change the legacy code if I can possibly avoid it.
Pseudo code (not compiled):
void someObject::someMethod()
{
for (int count = 0; count < someLimit; ++count)
{
newerObject::firstMethod();
olderObject::secondMethod();
newerObject::thirdMethod();
}
}
void newerObject::firstMethod()
{
// do some processing first
// then write the results of the processing to a file
ofstream A;
A.open("A", ofstream::out); // this sometimes must be tried multiple times
// write data to file A
A.close();
}
void olderObject::secondMethod()
{
FILE* f;
f = fopen("A", "rt"); // this always works the first time
// read data from file A
fclose(f);
// do some processing
f = fopen("B", "w");
// write data to file B
fclose(f);
}
void newerObject::thirdMethod()
{
ifstream B;
B.open("B"); // this always works the first time
// read data from file B
B.close();
// do some processing
}
Currently, as a work around, I put the ofstream::open in a do-while loop. I would love to get rid of this awkwardness. Thanks in advance for any advice you can give.
First off, the problem is almost certainly not the use of different methods to access the files: under the hood, the C and C++ I/O functions use the same system I/O facilities. You seem to be using Windows (on other systems files typically can be open multiple times simultaneously) and I don't know much about the system but I would suspect that the file system hasn't been updated to reflect that the file is closed when you try to open it. This may have to do with the "t" open flag: I don't know what this is about.
On UNIXes you can force the I/O operations to wait until the actual change on disk completed. Something like this could help avoiding the problem but has the significant cost that operations become hideously slow. On UNIXes one approach would be to blow away the file system entry the moment the file was opened successfully (after all, at this point its name isn't used anymore):
if (FILE* fp = fopen("file", "r")) {
remove("file");
// do processing
}
However, if I recall correctly on Windows you can neither remove the file nor rename it. Personally, in solving the problem I would proceed as follows:
Determine under which situations the file can't be opened, e.g. by keeping the file open and trying to open it. This is mainly intended to create a setup where the problem is reproducible so you can verify later that you indeed found a solution.
Once I found a way to reproduce the problem I would probably a better idea of the actual root cause and possibly googling would help. In any case this is the point where researching the root cause comes in.
Once the cause is understood it is hopefully easy to devise a solution. If not, opening the file multiple times under it is successful may very well be the right solution.
Imagine you have the following in C++:
ofstream myfile;
myfile.open (argv[1]);
if (myfile.is_open()){
for(int n=0;n<=10;n++){
myfile << "index="<<n<<endl;
sleep(1);
}
}else{
cerr << "Unable to open file";
}
myfile.close();
And while writing, the disk or medium you are writing to becomes unavailable but comes back on for the close() so that you have missing data in between. Or imagine you write to a USB flash drive and the device is withdrawn and re-inserted during the writing process.
How can you detect that ? I tried checking putting the write in try {} catch, flags(), rdstate(), you name it, but none thus far seem to work.
I don't think that is something you can detect at the stdio level. Typically when a hard drive temporarily stops responding, the operating system will automatically retry the commands either until they succeed or a timeout is reached, at which point your system call may receive an error. (OTOH it may not, because your call may have returned already, after the data was written into the in-memory filesystem cache but before any commands were sent to the actual disk)
If you really want to detect flakey hard drive, you'll probably need to code to a much lower level, e.g. write your own hardware driver.
IMHO you can try to:
Use ios:exceptions
Use low-level OS interactions
Verify that IO was successful (if 1 and 2 doesn't work)
I'm not sure if this will cover your scenario (removing a USB drive mid-write), but you can try enabling exceptions on the stream:
myfile.exceptions(ios::failbit | ios::badbit);
In my experience, iostreams do a "great" job of making it hard to detect errors and the type of error.
for(int n=0;n<=10;n++){
if (!(myfile << "index="<<n<<endl))
throw std::runtime_error("WRITE FAILED")
sleep(1);
}
If the std::ostream fails for any reason, it sets it's state bit, which is checked then the std::stream is in a boolean context. This is the same way you check if an std::istream read in data to a variable correctly.
However, this is the same as rdstate(), which you say you tried. If that's the case, the write has gotten to a buffer. endl, which flushes the programs buffer, shows that it's in the Operating System's buffer. From there, you'll have to use OS-specific calls to force it to flush the buffer.
[Edit] According to http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/17618685(v=VS.100).aspx, you can force a flush with _commit if you have a file descriptor. I can't find such a guarantee for std::ostreams.
I would like to know how to check if I have write permissions to a folder.
I'm writing a C++ project and I should print some data to a result.txt file, but I need to know if I have permissions or not.
Is the check different between Linux and Windows? Because my project should run on Linux and currently I'm working in Visual Studio.
The portable way to check permissions is to try to open the file and check if that succeeded. If not, and errno (from the header <cerrno> is set to the value EACCES [yes, with one S], then you did not have sufficient permissions. This should work on both Unix/Linux and Windows. Example for stdio:
FILE *fp = fopen("results.txt", "w");
if (fp == NULL) {
if (errno == EACCES)
cerr << "Permission denied" << endl;
else
cerr << "Something went wrong: " << strerror(errno) << endl;
}
Iostreams will work a bit differently. AFAIK, they do not guarantee to set errno on both platforms, or report more specific errors than just "failure".
As Jerry Coffin wrote, don't rely on separate access test functions since your program will be prone to race conditions and security holes.
About the only reasonable thing to do is try to create the file, and if it fails, tell the user there was a problem. Any attempt at testing ahead of time, and only trying to create the file if you'll be able to create and write to it is open to problems from race conditions (had permission when you checked, but it was removed by the time you tried to use it, or vice versa) and corner cases (e.g., you have permission to create a file in that directory, but attempting to write there will exceed your disk quota). The only way to know is to try...
The most correct way to actually test for file write permission is to attempt to write to the file. The reason for this is because different platforms expose write permissions in very different ways. Even worse, just because the operating system tells you that you can (or cannot) write to a file, it might actually be lying, for instance, on a unix system, the file modes might allow writing, but the file is on read only media, or conversely, the file might actually be a character device created by the kernel for the processes' own use, so even though its filemodes are set to all zeroes, the kernel allows that process (and only that process) to muck with it all it likes.
Similar to the accepted answer but using the non-deprecated fopen_s function as well as modern C++ and append open mode to avoid destroying the file contents:
bool is_file_writable(const std::filesystem::path &file_path)
{
FILE* file_handle;
errno_t file_open_error;
if ((file_open_error = fopen_s(&file_handle, file_path.string().c_str(), "a")) != 0)
{
return false;
}
fclose(file_handle);
return true;
}