Adding element to an array of strings
I've got an array of strings
char **tab;
and I want it to be able to increase as user types in new strings. I've created this code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv)
char **tab=malloc(sizeof(char*));
tab[0]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
int i=0;
int d=0;
while(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
if(d==0)
i--;
d++;
i++;
scanf("%s",tab[i]);
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
tab[i+1]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
return 0;
its purpose is to read new strings to tab untill user writes keyword "END". Since it's not known how many words will be inputted I tried to reallocate the size of array after each iteration. Unfortunately it prints Segmentation fault after getting 3 words.
What did i do wrong? Is there any better way to do this task?
Maximum length of any word is 40
c arrays string malloc
|
show 1 more comment
I've got an array of strings
char **tab;
and I want it to be able to increase as user types in new strings. I've created this code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv)
char **tab=malloc(sizeof(char*));
tab[0]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
int i=0;
int d=0;
while(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
if(d==0)
i--;
d++;
i++;
scanf("%s",tab[i]);
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
tab[i+1]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
return 0;
its purpose is to read new strings to tab untill user writes keyword "END". Since it's not known how many words will be inputted I tried to reallocate the size of array after each iteration. Unfortunately it prints Segmentation fault after getting 3 words.
What did i do wrong? Is there any better way to do this task?
Maximum length of any word is 40
c arrays string malloc
1
tab=realloc(tab,
...
– Stephan Lechner
Nov 12 '18 at 19:18
2
in the loop body,**tab=...
===>tab = ...
. Unrelated, this algorithm is inefficient, and more important, broken if you expect no allocations in the event the first string entered is"END"
. Just saying.
– WhozCraig
Nov 12 '18 at 19:19
It worked! Thank You. I can't even tell how dumb I feel right now
– Igor
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
1
Herewhile(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
the string variable pointed to bytab[i]
is uninitialized. You could considercalloc
instead ofmalloc
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
You don't need theif(d==0) …
part. Just move thei++
just belowscanf("%s",tab[i]);
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:25
|
show 1 more comment
I've got an array of strings
char **tab;
and I want it to be able to increase as user types in new strings. I've created this code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv)
char **tab=malloc(sizeof(char*));
tab[0]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
int i=0;
int d=0;
while(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
if(d==0)
i--;
d++;
i++;
scanf("%s",tab[i]);
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
tab[i+1]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
return 0;
its purpose is to read new strings to tab untill user writes keyword "END". Since it's not known how many words will be inputted I tried to reallocate the size of array after each iteration. Unfortunately it prints Segmentation fault after getting 3 words.
What did i do wrong? Is there any better way to do this task?
Maximum length of any word is 40
c arrays string malloc
I've got an array of strings
char **tab;
and I want it to be able to increase as user types in new strings. I've created this code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv)
char **tab=malloc(sizeof(char*));
tab[0]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
int i=0;
int d=0;
while(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
if(d==0)
i--;
d++;
i++;
scanf("%s",tab[i]);
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
tab[i+1]=malloc(41*sizeof(char));
return 0;
its purpose is to read new strings to tab untill user writes keyword "END". Since it's not known how many words will be inputted I tried to reallocate the size of array after each iteration. Unfortunately it prints Segmentation fault after getting 3 words.
What did i do wrong? Is there any better way to do this task?
Maximum length of any word is 40
c arrays string malloc
c arrays string malloc
asked Nov 12 '18 at 19:16
Igor
193
193
1
tab=realloc(tab,
...
– Stephan Lechner
Nov 12 '18 at 19:18
2
in the loop body,**tab=...
===>tab = ...
. Unrelated, this algorithm is inefficient, and more important, broken if you expect no allocations in the event the first string entered is"END"
. Just saying.
– WhozCraig
Nov 12 '18 at 19:19
It worked! Thank You. I can't even tell how dumb I feel right now
– Igor
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
1
Herewhile(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
the string variable pointed to bytab[i]
is uninitialized. You could considercalloc
instead ofmalloc
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
You don't need theif(d==0) …
part. Just move thei++
just belowscanf("%s",tab[i]);
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:25
|
show 1 more comment
1
tab=realloc(tab,
...
– Stephan Lechner
Nov 12 '18 at 19:18
2
in the loop body,**tab=...
===>tab = ...
. Unrelated, this algorithm is inefficient, and more important, broken if you expect no allocations in the event the first string entered is"END"
. Just saying.
– WhozCraig
Nov 12 '18 at 19:19
It worked! Thank You. I can't even tell how dumb I feel right now
– Igor
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
1
Herewhile(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
the string variable pointed to bytab[i]
is uninitialized. You could considercalloc
instead ofmalloc
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
You don't need theif(d==0) …
part. Just move thei++
just belowscanf("%s",tab[i]);
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:25
1
1
tab=realloc(tab,
...– Stephan Lechner
Nov 12 '18 at 19:18
tab=realloc(tab,
...– Stephan Lechner
Nov 12 '18 at 19:18
2
2
in the loop body,
**tab=...
===> tab = ...
. Unrelated, this algorithm is inefficient, and more important, broken if you expect no allocations in the event the first string entered is "END"
. Just saying.– WhozCraig
Nov 12 '18 at 19:19
in the loop body,
**tab=...
===> tab = ...
. Unrelated, this algorithm is inefficient, and more important, broken if you expect no allocations in the event the first string entered is "END"
. Just saying.– WhozCraig
Nov 12 '18 at 19:19
It worked! Thank You. I can't even tell how dumb I feel right now
– Igor
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
It worked! Thank You. I can't even tell how dumb I feel right now
– Igor
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
1
1
Here
while(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
the string variable pointed to by tab[i]
is uninitialized. You could consider calloc
instead of malloc
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
Here
while(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
the string variable pointed to by tab[i]
is uninitialized. You could consider calloc
instead of malloc
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
You don't need the
if(d==0) …
part. Just move the i++
just below scanf("%s",tab[i]);
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:25
You don't need the
if(d==0) …
part. Just move the i++
just below scanf("%s",tab[i]);
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:25
|
show 1 more comment
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Your algorithm is broken in two significant places
**tab = ...
in the loop body is wrong. Iftab
ischar**
, then*tab
would bechar*
, and**tab
would bechar
. Assigning a memory address tochar
should flag huge warnings from your toolchain, and if it doesn't either turn up your warning levels or get a new toolchain.- Initial entry to your while condition evaluates indeterminate data. At that time you have allocated raw memory for
tab[0]
, but nothing has populated it yet. Therefore, your program invokes undefined behavior.
Besides the above, expansion algorithms aren't complex, and explaining yours to your rubber-duck will help significantly before writing any code. In doing so, you'll see reallocating a pointer array with each new read is both costly and inefficient. A geometric expansion algorithms makes this much better. As a bonus, it fixes both of the problems above.
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char **tab = NULL;
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
size_t slen = strlen(str)+1;
if ((tab[size] = malloc(slen)) == NULL)
perror("Failed to allocate buffer for new string");
break;
// copy incoming string; update 'size' to reflect new count
memcpy(tab[size++], str, slen);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' pointers.
//
// then free the table
while (size-- > 0)
free(tab[size]);
free(tab);
return 0;
Alternative: No pointers to pointers
If your need truly requires fixed length allocations (as your code demonstrates), you don't need pointers to pointers at all (unless there is some hidden agenda for something like sorting where swapping pointers is much more efficient than swapping full string buffers).
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char (*tab)[MAX_BUFLEN] = NULL; // see difference here
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
// notice no additional allocations here
strcpy(tab[size++], str);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' strings.
//
// then free the table
free(tab);
return 0;
Summary
Fixing your code was fairly simple, but making it better is too. Never stop thinking about why you're doing what your doing when crafting your algorithms, and spend plenty of time talk with your rubber-duck.
add a comment |
The problem lies in this line:
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
Here **tab
dereferences tab
to the first character in the first string stored in tab
, which isn't what you want. Try this instead:
tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
If you turn on compiler warnings, they should catch this type of mistake.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53268686%2fadding-element-to-an-array-of-strings%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Your algorithm is broken in two significant places
**tab = ...
in the loop body is wrong. Iftab
ischar**
, then*tab
would bechar*
, and**tab
would bechar
. Assigning a memory address tochar
should flag huge warnings from your toolchain, and if it doesn't either turn up your warning levels or get a new toolchain.- Initial entry to your while condition evaluates indeterminate data. At that time you have allocated raw memory for
tab[0]
, but nothing has populated it yet. Therefore, your program invokes undefined behavior.
Besides the above, expansion algorithms aren't complex, and explaining yours to your rubber-duck will help significantly before writing any code. In doing so, you'll see reallocating a pointer array with each new read is both costly and inefficient. A geometric expansion algorithms makes this much better. As a bonus, it fixes both of the problems above.
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char **tab = NULL;
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
size_t slen = strlen(str)+1;
if ((tab[size] = malloc(slen)) == NULL)
perror("Failed to allocate buffer for new string");
break;
// copy incoming string; update 'size' to reflect new count
memcpy(tab[size++], str, slen);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' pointers.
//
// then free the table
while (size-- > 0)
free(tab[size]);
free(tab);
return 0;
Alternative: No pointers to pointers
If your need truly requires fixed length allocations (as your code demonstrates), you don't need pointers to pointers at all (unless there is some hidden agenda for something like sorting where swapping pointers is much more efficient than swapping full string buffers).
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char (*tab)[MAX_BUFLEN] = NULL; // see difference here
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
// notice no additional allocations here
strcpy(tab[size++], str);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' strings.
//
// then free the table
free(tab);
return 0;
Summary
Fixing your code was fairly simple, but making it better is too. Never stop thinking about why you're doing what your doing when crafting your algorithms, and spend plenty of time talk with your rubber-duck.
add a comment |
Your algorithm is broken in two significant places
**tab = ...
in the loop body is wrong. Iftab
ischar**
, then*tab
would bechar*
, and**tab
would bechar
. Assigning a memory address tochar
should flag huge warnings from your toolchain, and if it doesn't either turn up your warning levels or get a new toolchain.- Initial entry to your while condition evaluates indeterminate data. At that time you have allocated raw memory for
tab[0]
, but nothing has populated it yet. Therefore, your program invokes undefined behavior.
Besides the above, expansion algorithms aren't complex, and explaining yours to your rubber-duck will help significantly before writing any code. In doing so, you'll see reallocating a pointer array with each new read is both costly and inefficient. A geometric expansion algorithms makes this much better. As a bonus, it fixes both of the problems above.
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char **tab = NULL;
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
size_t slen = strlen(str)+1;
if ((tab[size] = malloc(slen)) == NULL)
perror("Failed to allocate buffer for new string");
break;
// copy incoming string; update 'size' to reflect new count
memcpy(tab[size++], str, slen);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' pointers.
//
// then free the table
while (size-- > 0)
free(tab[size]);
free(tab);
return 0;
Alternative: No pointers to pointers
If your need truly requires fixed length allocations (as your code demonstrates), you don't need pointers to pointers at all (unless there is some hidden agenda for something like sorting where swapping pointers is much more efficient than swapping full string buffers).
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char (*tab)[MAX_BUFLEN] = NULL; // see difference here
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
// notice no additional allocations here
strcpy(tab[size++], str);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' strings.
//
// then free the table
free(tab);
return 0;
Summary
Fixing your code was fairly simple, but making it better is too. Never stop thinking about why you're doing what your doing when crafting your algorithms, and spend plenty of time talk with your rubber-duck.
add a comment |
Your algorithm is broken in two significant places
**tab = ...
in the loop body is wrong. Iftab
ischar**
, then*tab
would bechar*
, and**tab
would bechar
. Assigning a memory address tochar
should flag huge warnings from your toolchain, and if it doesn't either turn up your warning levels or get a new toolchain.- Initial entry to your while condition evaluates indeterminate data. At that time you have allocated raw memory for
tab[0]
, but nothing has populated it yet. Therefore, your program invokes undefined behavior.
Besides the above, expansion algorithms aren't complex, and explaining yours to your rubber-duck will help significantly before writing any code. In doing so, you'll see reallocating a pointer array with each new read is both costly and inefficient. A geometric expansion algorithms makes this much better. As a bonus, it fixes both of the problems above.
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char **tab = NULL;
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
size_t slen = strlen(str)+1;
if ((tab[size] = malloc(slen)) == NULL)
perror("Failed to allocate buffer for new string");
break;
// copy incoming string; update 'size' to reflect new count
memcpy(tab[size++], str, slen);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' pointers.
//
// then free the table
while (size-- > 0)
free(tab[size]);
free(tab);
return 0;
Alternative: No pointers to pointers
If your need truly requires fixed length allocations (as your code demonstrates), you don't need pointers to pointers at all (unless there is some hidden agenda for something like sorting where swapping pointers is much more efficient than swapping full string buffers).
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char (*tab)[MAX_BUFLEN] = NULL; // see difference here
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
// notice no additional allocations here
strcpy(tab[size++], str);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' strings.
//
// then free the table
free(tab);
return 0;
Summary
Fixing your code was fairly simple, but making it better is too. Never stop thinking about why you're doing what your doing when crafting your algorithms, and spend plenty of time talk with your rubber-duck.
Your algorithm is broken in two significant places
**tab = ...
in the loop body is wrong. Iftab
ischar**
, then*tab
would bechar*
, and**tab
would bechar
. Assigning a memory address tochar
should flag huge warnings from your toolchain, and if it doesn't either turn up your warning levels or get a new toolchain.- Initial entry to your while condition evaluates indeterminate data. At that time you have allocated raw memory for
tab[0]
, but nothing has populated it yet. Therefore, your program invokes undefined behavior.
Besides the above, expansion algorithms aren't complex, and explaining yours to your rubber-duck will help significantly before writing any code. In doing so, you'll see reallocating a pointer array with each new read is both costly and inefficient. A geometric expansion algorithms makes this much better. As a bonus, it fixes both of the problems above.
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char **tab = NULL;
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
size_t slen = strlen(str)+1;
if ((tab[size] = malloc(slen)) == NULL)
perror("Failed to allocate buffer for new string");
break;
// copy incoming string; update 'size' to reflect new count
memcpy(tab[size++], str, slen);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' pointers.
//
// then free the table
while (size-- > 0)
free(tab[size]);
free(tab);
return 0;
Alternative: No pointers to pointers
If your need truly requires fixed length allocations (as your code demonstrates), you don't need pointers to pointers at all (unless there is some hidden agenda for something like sorting where swapping pointers is much more efficient than swapping full string buffers).
Code
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define MAX_BUFLEN 41
#define MAX_STR_FMT "%40s"
int main()
char (*tab)[MAX_BUFLEN] = NULL; // see difference here
size_t size = 0, capacity = 0;
char str[MAX_BUFLEN];
while (scanf(MAX_STR_FMT, str) == 1 && strcmp(str, "END"))
// check for expansion
if (size == capacity)
size_t new_capacity = 2 * capacity + 1;
void *tmp = realloc(tab, new_capacity * sizeof *tab);
if (tmp == NULL)
perror("Failed to expand dynamic table");
break;
// save expanded table, and update capacity
tab = tmp;
capacity = new_capacity;
// notice no additional allocations here
strcpy(tab[size++], str);
//
// TODO: use 'tab' holding 'size' strings.
//
// then free the table
free(tab);
return 0;
Summary
Fixing your code was fairly simple, but making it better is too. Never stop thinking about why you're doing what your doing when crafting your algorithms, and spend plenty of time talk with your rubber-duck.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 19:53
WhozCraig
51.1k958107
51.1k958107
add a comment |
add a comment |
The problem lies in this line:
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
Here **tab
dereferences tab
to the first character in the first string stored in tab
, which isn't what you want. Try this instead:
tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
If you turn on compiler warnings, they should catch this type of mistake.
add a comment |
The problem lies in this line:
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
Here **tab
dereferences tab
to the first character in the first string stored in tab
, which isn't what you want. Try this instead:
tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
If you turn on compiler warnings, they should catch this type of mistake.
add a comment |
The problem lies in this line:
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
Here **tab
dereferences tab
to the first character in the first string stored in tab
, which isn't what you want. Try this instead:
tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
If you turn on compiler warnings, they should catch this type of mistake.
The problem lies in this line:
**tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
Here **tab
dereferences tab
to the first character in the first string stored in tab
, which isn't what you want. Try this instead:
tab=realloc(tab,(i+2)*sizeof(char*));
If you turn on compiler warnings, they should catch this type of mistake.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 19:46
Henning Koehler
1,129610
1,129610
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53268686%2fadding-element-to-an-array-of-strings%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
tab=realloc(tab,
...– Stephan Lechner
Nov 12 '18 at 19:18
2
in the loop body,
**tab=...
===>tab = ...
. Unrelated, this algorithm is inefficient, and more important, broken if you expect no allocations in the event the first string entered is"END"
. Just saying.– WhozCraig
Nov 12 '18 at 19:19
It worked! Thank You. I can't even tell how dumb I feel right now
– Igor
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
1
Here
while(strcmp(tab[i],"END"))
the string variable pointed to bytab[i]
is uninitialized. You could considercalloc
instead ofmalloc
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:21
You don't need the
if(d==0) …
part. Just move thei++
just belowscanf("%s",tab[i]);
– 4386427
Nov 12 '18 at 19:25