C++ Stack Implementation - c++

Hey all! Having a little trouble with my stack. Im trying to print each element that I've pushed onto the stack.
Starting with the stack ctor we know that we have a fixed size for the array. So I allocate the items struct object to hold just that much space:
stack::stack(int capacity)
{
items = new item[capacity];
if ( items == NULL ) {
throw "Cannot Allocoate Sufficient Memmory";
exit(1);
}
maxSize = capacity;
top = -1;
}
Yes, items is a struct type of the object "item". Have a look:
class stack
{
stack(int capacity);
~stack(void);
...
private:
int maxSize; // is for the item stack
int top; // is the top of the stack
struct item {
int n;
};
item *items;
public:
friend ostream& operator<<(ostream& out, stack& q)
...
First and formost we want to add to the stack by pushing each incoming element into the array FILO:
bool stack::pushFront( const int n )
{
if ( top >= maxSize-1 )
{
throw "Stack Full On Push";
return false;
}
else
{
++top;
items[top].n = n;
}
return true;
}
// just a textbook example here:
stack::~stack(void)
{
delete [] items;
items = NULL;
maxSize = 0;
top = -1;
}
Yes the real issue for me is the items[++top].n = n; statement. I've been trying to find out how I can drag (+) the items array out to see ALL of the array elements after I push onto the stack.
Im wondering why I cant drag that items[++top].n = n statement out when im debugging. All that comes up is the value that is passed as an 'n' paramater. Do I need to use a stack object type array to store the values into?
When I overload the << operator and try to print the elements I get an insanely large negative number:
ostream& operator<<(ostream& out, stack& q)
{
if ( q.top <= 0 ) // bad check for empty or full node
out << endl << "stack: empty" << endl << endl;
else
for ( int x = 0; x < q.maxSize; x++ )
{
out << q.items[x].n; // try to print elements
}
return out;
}
I'm way off and I need some guidence if anyone has the time!

In the overloaded << operator in the for loop you are iterating maxsize times. But you might not have pushed maxsize elements into the stack. You should iterate top times. Also, write a default constructor for item structure and initialize all the variblaes so that you do not get garbage values when you try to print them.

When printing the stack, you should only go up to top, not up to maxSize.

Related

Delete Zero in ArrayList in C++

Inside the ArrayList I'm trying to delete all possible 0's that are appended as input, but for now it only deletes just one 0, no matter where it is located. But seems like I can't delete more than one zero at the time. How can I fix this?
void AList::elimZeros(){
int i;
int curr = 0;
for(i=0; i < listSize; i++) {
if ( (listArray[i] != 0 ) && (curr<listSize) ){
listArray[curr] = listArray[i];
curr++;
}
else if (listArray[i] == 0 )
{
listArray[curr] = listArray[i+1];
listSize--;
curr++;
}
}
}
This is the class for the ADT
class AList : public List {
private:
ListItemType* listArray; // Array holding list elements
static const int DEFAULT_SIZE = 10; // Default size
int maxSize; // Maximum size of list
int listSize; // Current # of list items
int curr; // Position of current element
// Duplicates the size of the array pointed to by listArray
// and update the value of maxSize.
void resize();
public:
// Constructors
// Create a new list object with maximum size "size"
AList(int size = DEFAULT_SIZE) : listSize(0), curr(0) {
maxSize = size;
listArray = new ListItemType[size]; // Create listArray
}
~AList(); // destructor to remove array
This is the input I'm testing with:
int main() {
AList L(10);
AList L2(20);
L.append(10);
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10>");
L.append(20);
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10,20>");
L.append(30);
L.append(0);
L.append(40);
L.append(0);
L.append(0);
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10,20,30,0,40>");
L.elimZeros();
expect(L.to_string()=="<|10,20,30,40>");
assertionReport();
}
It'd be helpful if you posted the class code for AList. Think you confused Java's ArrayList type, but assuming you're using vectors you can always just do:
for (int i = 0; i < listSize; i++) {
if(listArray[i] == 0) listArray.erase(i);
}
EDIT: Assuming this is the template of for the AList class, then there is simply a remove() function. In terms of your code, there are two issues.
You reference listSize in the for loop, then decrement it inside of the loop. Each iteration evaluates the value separately so you're reducing the number of total loop iterations and stopping early.
The other thing is if the entry is zero you shouldn't increment curr and set listArray[curr] = listArray[i+1]. This is basically assuming the next entry will not be a zero. So if it is, then you're copying the element and moving to the next. Your if statement can be cleaned up with:
if (listArray[i] == 0) {
listSize--;
} else {
listArray[curr] = listArray[i];
curr++;
}

How to index array of pointers to arrays [queue]?

I am trying program a queue with arrays in C++.
I used this approach https://stackoverflow.com/a/936709/7104310 as shown below.
My question: How can I index the arrays to fill them?
In a normal 2d-array it would be arr[3][2] for example. But I do not know how to do this with pointers. The question hat not been answered in the Solution upon.
Thank you!
#include <iostream>
#define MAX_SIZE 3
using namespace std;
// ary[i][j] is then rewritten as
//arr[rear*capacity + front]
// Class for queue
class msg_queue
{
char **arr; // array to store queue elements
int capacity; // maximum capacity of the queue
int front; // front points to front element in the queue (if any)
int rear; // rear points to last element in the queue
int count; // current size of the queue
public:
msg_queue(int size = MAX_SIZE, int slot_length = MAX_SIZE); // constructor
void dequeue();
void enqueue(char x);
char peek();
int size();
bool isEmpty();
bool isFull();
};
// Constructor to initialize queue
msg_queue::msg_queue(int size, int slot_length)
{
arr = new char*[size];
for (int i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
arr[i] = new char[slot_length];
}
capacity = size;
front = 0;
rear = -1;
count = 0;
}
// Utility function to remove front element from the queue
void msg_queue::dequeue()
{
// check for queue underflow
if (isEmpty())
{
cout << "UnderFlow\nProgram Terminated\n";
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
cout << "Removing " << arr[front] << '\n';
front = (front + 1) % capacity;
count--;
}
// Utility function to add an item to the queue
void msg_queue::enqueue(char item)
{
// check for queue overflow
if (isFull())
{
cout << "OverFlow\nProgram Terminated\n";
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
cout << "Inserting " << item << '\n';
rear = (rear + 1) % capacity;
arr[rear] = item; //ERROR HERE
count++;
}
// Utility function to return front element in the queue
char msg_queue::peek()
{
if (isEmpty())
{
cout << "UnderFlow\nProgram Terminated\n";
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
return arr[front]; //ERROR HERE
}
Well, it's still arr[3][2].
Although arrays are not pointers, the way we use them is effectively using a pointer because of the way they work and the way their name decays.
x[y] is *(x+y), by definition.
That being said, I would recommend you drop the 2D dynamic allocation (which is poison for your cache) and create one big block of Width×Height chars instead. You can use a little bit of maths to provide 2D indexes over that data.
Also you forgot to free any of that memory. If you use a nice std::vector to implement my suggested 1D data scheme (or even if you hire a vector of vectors, but ew!) then it'll be destroyed for you. Of course if you could do that then you'd probably be using std::queue…

Member variable resetting back to 0

When running through the test the count variable from the class stack1 gets reset back to 0 when using its pop function. Strangely however, during the push loop, the count increases as intended but when pop occurs, the count gets reset back to 0 and subtracts into the negatives from there. Is there something I'm forgetting?
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class TheStack
{
public:
TheStack();
void push(int);
int pop();
bool isEmpty();
private:
const int MaxSize = 10;
int arr[10];
int count;
};
TheStack::TheStack()
{
count = 0;
}
void TheStack::push(int userInput)
{
if (count >= MaxSize)
{
cout << "Stack is full." << endl;
}
else
{
arr[count] = userInput;
count+=1;
}
}
int TheStack::pop()
{
if (isEmpty())
{
cout << "Stack is empty." << endl;
}
else
{
int temp = arr[count];
arr[count] = NULL;
count-=1;
return temp;
}
}
bool TheStack::isEmpty()
{
if (count == 0)
{
return true;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
int main()
{
TheStack stack1;
if (stack1.isEmpty())
{
cout << "isEmpty() works" << endl;
}
stack1.pop();
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
stack1.push(i);
}
stack1.push(0);
stack1.pop();
stack1.pop();
stack1.pop();
stack1.pop();
system("pause");
}
When you do push you first save the data into the array and then increment count. This means that in order to properly do pop you need to work in reverse: first decrement count and only then read data from the array.
But in the code you are doing it backwards. When the stack is full, count is at max value (10 in your case), and your arr[count] = NULL; writes beyond the array boundary. This causes undefined behavior and, in particular, destroys your count value. (This is why it suddenly becomes 0.)
Also:
arr[count] = NULL; makes no sense. NULL is supposed to be used in pointer contexts, not in integer contexts. This is not even guaranteed to compile.
What is the point of that anyway? Initially your array contains garbage above the current top of the stack. Why do you suddenly care to clean it up after doing pop?
Not all control paths of pop() return value. This is undefined behavior in itself.
const int MaxSize = 10; in the class definition is a C++11 feature. Since you are already using C++11, you can do the same for count. Just do int count = 0; right inside the class definition and you will not have to write the constructor explicitly.
Although in your implementation MaxSize would make more sense as a static const class member. In that case you'll also be able to declare your array as int arr[MaxSize];.
You must first decrease count and then access arr[count] in int TheStack::pop(). Now you get access above the last pushed element, event out of bound of array if the stack is full.

Stack (Data structure) implementation

So I'm just starting to learn about data structures through a course on Coursera and I learned that it's possible to create a stack data structure by using an array. I was just wondering if what I have written is what a stack is supposed to do.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
const int MAX_SIZE = 10000;
class Stack {
public:
Stack();
~Stack();
void push(int n);
void pop();
int top();
bool isEmpty() const;
void print() const;
private:
int* array [MAX_SIZE];
int curNum;
};
Stack::Stack() {
curNum = 0;
}
Stack::~Stack() {
for (int i = 0; i < curNum; ++i)
delete array[i];
}
void Stack::push(int n) {
if (curNum >= MAX_SIZE) {
cout << "reached maximum capacity...can't add an element\n";
return;
}
array[curNum] = new int(n);
curNum++;
}
void Stack::pop() {
delete array[curNum];
curNum--;
}
int Stack::top() {
return *array[curNum];
}
void Stack::print() const{
for (int i = 0; i < curNum; ++i)
cout << *array[i] << endl;
}
bool Stack::isEmpty() const{
return curNum == 0;
}
int main () {
Stack stack;
stack.push(5);
stack.print();
stack.pop();
}
Also, I see that a lot of people don't use dynamic memory allocation for this kind of task. Is there a reason why? It seems like specifying a size for the array at compile time might lead to insufficient memory or over-allocating memory to me
Yes, this is one way to implement a stack. The important thing that defines a stack is LIFO (last in, first out). So as long as you are only adding to and removing from the top, then that is a stack. Think of it as a stack of dishes; if 10 dishes are put one by one into a stack, and then one by one removed from said stack, the first dish put on will also be the last dish removed. You can't remove a dish that's not at the top, as it is covered by all the dishes above it. The same is true with a stack data structure.
So your implementation is indeed a stack.
The stack we use when we want something in reverse order and stack also takes constant time means O(1) time to push and pop means to remove or to add it will work much faster

C++: Program crash while adding object to custom vector class

I'm working on an email validation program for my cmpsci class and am having trouble with this one part.
What I'm doing is reading a list of valid top level domains from a text file into a vector class I wrote myself (I have to use a custom vector class unfortunately). The problem is that the program reads in and adds the first few domains to the vector all well and fine, but then crashes when it gets to the "org" line. I'm completely stumped why it works for the first few and then crashes.
Also, I have to use a custom string class; that's why I have the weird getline function (so I get the input in a char* for my String constructor). I've tried using the standard string class with this function and it still crashed in the same way so I can rule out the source of the problem being my string class. The whole program is quite large so I am only posting the most relevant parts. Let me know if more code is needed please. Any help would be awesome since I have no clue where to go from here. Thanks!
The ReadTlds function:
void Tld::ReadTlds() {
// Load the TLD's into the vector
validTlds = Vector<String>(0); // Init vector; declaration from header file: "static Vector<String>validTlds;"
ifstream in(TLD_FILE);
while(!in.eof()) {
char tmpInput[MAX_TLD_LENGTH]; // MAX_TLD_LENGTH equals 30
in.getline(tmpInput, MAX_TLD_LENGTH);
validTlds.Add(String(tmpInput)); // Crashes here!
}
}
My custom vector class:
#pragma once
#include <sstream>
#define INIT_CAPACITY 100
#define CAPACITY_BOOST 100
template<typename T> class Vector {
public:
// Default constructor
Vector() {
Data=NULL;
size=0;
capacity=INIT_CAPACITY;
}
// Init constructor
Vector(int Capacity) : size(0), capacity(Capacity) {
Data = new T[capacity];
}
// Destructor
~Vector() {
size=0;
Data = NULL;
delete[] Data;
}
// Accessors
int GetSize() const {return size;}
T* GetData() {return Data;}
void SetSize(const int size) {this->size = size;}
// Functions
void Add(const T& newElement) {
Insert(newElement, size);
}
void Insert(const T& newElement, int index) {
// Check if index is in bounds
if((index<0) || (index>capacity)) {
std::stringstream err;
err << "Vector::Insert(): Index " << index << " out of bounds (0-" << capacity-1 << ")";
throw err.str();
}
// Check capacity
if(size>=capacity)
Grow();
// Move all elements right of index to the right
for(int i=size-1; i>=index; i--)
Data[i+1]=Data[i];
// Put the new element at the specified index
Data[index] = newElement;
size++;
}
void Remove(int index) {
// Check if index is in bounds
if((index<0) || (index>capacity-1)) {
std::stringstream err;
err << "Vector::Remove():Index " << index << " out of bounds (0-" << capacity-1 << ")";
throw err.str();
}
// Move all elements right of index to the left
for(int i=index+1; i<size; i++)
Data[i-1]=Data[i];
}
// Index operator
T& operator [] (int index) const {
// Check if index is in bounds
if((index<0) || (index>capacity-1)) {
std::stringstream err;
err << "Vector operator[]:Index " << index << " out of bounds (0-" << capacity-1 << ")";
throw err.str();
}
return Data[index];
}
// Assignment oper
Vector<T>& operator = (const Vector<T>& right) {
Data = new T[right.GetSize()];
for(int i=0; i<right.GetSize(); i++)
Data[i] = right[i];
size = right.GetSize();
return *this;
}
private:
T *Data;
int size; // Current vector size
int capacity; // Max size of vector
void Grow() {
capacity+=CAPACITY_BOOST;
T* newData = new T[capacity];
for(int i=0; i<capacity; i++)
newData[i] = Data[i];
// Dispose old array
Data = NULL;
delete[] Data;
// Assign new array to the old array's variable
Data = newData;
}
};
The input file:
aero
asia
biz
cat
com
coop
edu
gov
info
int
jobs
mil
mobi
museum
name
net
org <-- crashes when this line is read
pro
tel
travel
The error Visual Studio throws is:
Unhandled exception at 0x5fb04013 (msvcp100d.dll) in Email4.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0xabababbb.
The problem is in your grow function:
void Grow() {
capacity+=CAPACITY_BOOST;
T* newData = new T[capacity];
for(int i=0; i<capacity; i++)
newData[i] = Data[i];
You increase the capacity, but then copy elements that didn't exist in the old array. It should be something like:
void Grow() {
int old_capacity = capacity;
capacity+=CAPACITY_BOOST;
T* newData = new T[capacity];
for(int i=0; i<old_capacity; i++)
newData[i] = Data[i];
You also NULL out Data before deleting it in both Grow and the destructor, which causes a memory leak. In both cases, you really don't need to set it to NULL at all, since there's no change of it being accidentally double-deleted (in Grow it's set to a new pointer immediately, in the destructor the object's lifetime is over). So just
delete[] Data;
alone is fine.
Also I think
if(size>=capacity)
can be:
if(size == capacity)
since size should never be over capacity. That would mean you'd already overflowed the buffer.
Matthew is probably right. Still, there's a valuable lesson to be learned here.
When you hit a problem like this, don't stop walking your code in your ReadTlds function. Keep walking inside the Vector class. Functions like Insert and Grow probably hold the error, but if you don't walk through them, you'll never find it.
Debugging is it's own very special skill. It takes a long time to get it down pat.
edit it's a late night and I misread your code, but I left my post to comment back
Also in the default ctor you do
Data = NULL;
capacity=INIT_CAPACITY;
(EDIT: expanded explanation here)
But never allocate the memory for Data. Shouldn't it be:
Vector() {
Data= new T[INIT_CAPCITY];
size=0;
capacity=INIT_CAPACITY;
}
And remove is missing
--size
EDIT:
Fellow readers help me out here:
Data is of type T* but everywhere else you are assigning and allocating it just like T instead of T* . My C++ days are too long gone to remember whether using a T& actually resolves this.
Also I can't remember that if you have an array of pointers and destruct it, that the dtor for the single instances in the array are destroyed.
Also in the assignment operator, wouldn't you be copying the pinters? so you just have to rely on the fact the the instance where you copyid from is never deleted (because then your objects would be dead too).
hth Mario