C: pointer to array of pointers to structures (allocation/deallocation issues)
I've been getting back into C for something, but I'm having trouble remembering much of how this memory management works. I'd like to have a pointer to an array of pointers to structures.
Say I have:
struct Test {
int data;
};
Then the array:
struct Test **array1;
Is this correct? My issue is working with this thing. So each pointer in the array points to something that is allocated separately. But I think I need to do this first:
array1 = malloc(MAX * sizeof(struct Test *));
I am having trouble understanding the above. Do I need to do this, and why do I need to do this? In particular, what does it mean to allocate memory for pointers if I am going to be allocating memory for each thing that the pointer points to?
Say now I have pointer to an array of pointers to structures. I now want it to point to the same array that I've created earlier.
struct Test **array2;
Do I need to allocate room for pointers like I did above, or can I just do:
array2 = array1
Allocated Array
With an allocated array it's straightforward enough to follow.
Declare your array of pointers. Each element in this array points to a struct Test:
struct Test *array[50];
Then allocate and assign the pointers to the structures however you want. Using a loop would be simple:
array[n] = malloc(sizeof(struct Test));
Then declare a pointer to this array:
// an explicit pointer to an array
struct Test *(*p)[] = &array; // of pointers to structs
This allows you to use (*p)[n]->data; to reference the nth member.
Don't worry if this stuff is confusing. It's probably the most difficult aspect of C.
Dynamic Linear Array
If you just want to allocate a block of structs (effectively an array of structs, not pointers to structs), and have a pointer to the block, you can do it more easily:
struct Test *p = malloc(100 * sizeof(struct Test)); // allocates 100 linear
// structs
You can then point to this pointer:
struct Test **pp = &p
You don't have an array of pointers to structs any more, but it simplifies the whole thing considerably.
Dynamic Array of Dynamically Allocated Structs
The most flexible, but not often needed. It's very similar to the first example, but requires an extra allocation. I've written a complete program to demonstrate this that should compile fine.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
struct Test {
int data;
};
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
srand(time(NULL));
// allocate 100 pointers, effectively an array
struct Test **t_array = malloc(100 * sizeof(struct Test *));
// allocate 100 structs and have the array point to them
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
t_array[i] = malloc(sizeof(struct Test));
}
// lets fill each Test.data with a random number!
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
t_array[i]->data = rand() % 100;
}
// now define a pointer to the array
struct Test ***p = &t_array;
printf("p points to an array of pointers.\n"
"The third element of the array points to a structure,\n"
"and the data member of that structure is: %d\n", (*p)[2]->data);
return 0;
}
Output:
> p points to an array of pointers.
> The third element of the array points to a structure,
> and the data member of that structure is: 49
Or the whole set:
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
if (i % 10 == 0)
printf("\n");
printf("%3d ", (*p)[i]->data);
}
35 66 40 24 32 27 39 64 65 26
32 30 72 84 85 95 14 25 11 40
30 16 47 21 80 57 25 34 47 19
56 82 38 96 6 22 76 97 87 93
75 19 24 47 55 9 43 69 86 6
61 17 23 8 38 55 65 16 90 12
87 46 46 25 42 4 48 70 53 35
64 29 6 40 76 13 1 71 82 88
78 44 57 53 4 47 8 70 63 98
34 51 44 33 28 39 37 76 9 91
Dynamic Pointer Array of Single-Dynamic Allocated Structs
This last example is rather specific. It is a dynamic array of pointers as we've seen in previous examples, but unlike those, the elements are all allocated in a single allocation. This has its uses, most notable for sorting data in different configurations while leaving the original allocation undisturbed.
We start by allocating a single block of elements as we do in the most basic single-block allocation:
struct Test *arr = malloc(N*sizeof(*arr));
Now we allocate a separate block of pointers:
struct Test **ptrs = malloc(N*sizeof(*ptrs));
We then populate each slot in our pointer list with the address of one of our original array. Since pointer arithmetic allows us to move from element to element address, this is straight-forward:
for (int i=0;i<N;++i)
ptrs[i] = arr+i;
At this point the following both refer to the same element field
arr[1].data = 1;
ptrs[1]->data = 1;
And after review the above, I hope it is clear why.
When we're done with the pointer array and the original block array they are freed as:
free(ptrs);
free(arr);
Note: we do NOT free each item in the ptrs[] array individually. That is not how they were allocated. They were allocated as a single block (pointed to by arr), and that is how they should be freed.
So why would someone want to do this? Several reasons.
First, it radically reduces the number of memory allocation calls. Rather then N+1 (one for the pointer array, N for individual structures) you now have only two: one for the array block, and one for the pointer array. Memory allocations are one of the most expensive operations a program can request, and where possible, it is desirable to minimize them (note: file IO is another, fyi).
Another reason: Multiple representations of the same base array of data. Suppose you wanted to sort the data both ascending and descending, and have both sorted representations available at the same time. You could duplicate the data array, but that would require a lot of copying and eat significant memory usage. Instead, just allocate an extra pointer array and fill it with addresses from the base array, then sort that pointer array. This has especially significant benefits when the data being sorted is large (perhaps kilobytes, or even larger, per item) The original items remain in their original locations in the base array, but now you have a very efficient mechanism in which you can sort them without having to actually move them. You sort the array of pointers to items; the items don't get moved at all.
I realize this is an awful lot to take in, but pointer usage is critical to understanding the many powerful things you can do with the C language, so hit the books and keep refreshing your memory. It will come back.
It may be better to declare an actual array, as others have suggested, but your question seems to be more about memory management so I'll discuss that.
struct Test **array1;
This is a pointer to the address of a struct Test. (Not a pointer to the struct itself; it's a pointer to a memory location that holds the address of the struct.) The declaration allocates memory for the pointer, but not for the items it points to. Since an array can be accessed via pointers, you can work with *array1 as a pointer to an array whose elements are of type struct Test. But there is not yet an actual array for it to point to.
array1 = malloc(MAX * sizeof(struct Test *));
This allocates memory to hold MAX pointers to items of type struct Test. Again, it does not allocate memory for the structs themselves; only for a list of pointers. But now you can treat array as a pointer to an allocated array of pointers.
In order to use array1, you need to create the actual structs. You can do this by simply declaring each struct with
struct Test testStruct0; // Declare a struct.
struct Test testStruct1;
array1[0] = &testStruct0; // Point to the struct.
array1[1] = &testStruct1;
You can also allocate the structs on the heap:
for (int i=0; i<MAX; ++i) {
array1[i] = malloc(sizeof(struct Test));
}
Once you've allocated memory, you can create a new variable that points to the same list of structs:
struct Test **array2 = array1;
You don't need to allocate any additional memory, because array2 points to the same memory you've allocated to array1.
Sometimes you want to have a pointer to a list of pointers, but unless you're doing something fancy, you may be able to use
struct Test *array1 = malloc(MAX * sizeof(struct Test)); // Pointer to MAX structs
This declares the pointer array1, allocated enough memory for MAX structures, and points array1 to that memory. Now you can access the structs like this:
struct Test testStruct0 = array1[0]; // Copies the 0th struct.
struct Test testStruct0a= *array1; // Copies the 0th struct, as above.
struct Test *ptrStruct0 = array1; // Points to the 0th struct.
struct Test testStruct1 = array1[1]; // Copies the 1st struct.
struct Test testStruct1a= *(array1 + 1); // Copies the 1st struct, as above.
struct Test *ptrStruct1 = array1 + 1; // Points to the 1st struct.
struct Test *ptrStruct1 = &array1[1]; // Points to the 1st struct, as above.
So what's the difference? A few things. Clearly, the first method requires you to allocate memory for the pointers, and then allocate additional space for the structs themselves; the second lets you get away with one malloc() call. What does the extra work buy you?
Since the first method gives you an actual array of pointers to Test structs, each pointer can point to any Test struct, anywhere in memory; they needn't be contiguous. Moreover, you can allocate and free the memory for each actual Test struct as necessary, and you can reassign the pointers. So, for example, you can swap two structures by simply exchanging their pointers:
struct Test *tmp = array1[2]; // Save the pointer to one struct.
array1[2] = array1[5]; // Aim the pointer at a different struct.
array1[5] = tmp; // Aim the other pointer at the original struct.
On the other hand, the second method allocates a single contiguous block of memory for all of the Test structs and partitions it into MAX items. And each element in the array resides at a fixed position; the only way to swap two structures is to copy them.
Pointers are one of the most useful constructs in C, but they can also be among the most difficult to understand. If you plan to continue using C, it'll probably be a worthwhile investment to spend some time playing with pointers, arrays, and a debugger until you're comfortable with them.
Good luck!
I suggest that you build this out a layer at a time using typdefs to create layers of types. By doing so, the different types needed will be much clearer.
For instance:
typedef struct Test {
int data;
} TestType;
typedef TestType * PTestType;
This will create two new types, one for the struct and one for a pointer to the struct.
So next if you want an array of the structs then you would use:
TestType array[20]; // creates an array of 20 of the structs
If you want an array of pointers to the structs then you would use:
PTestType array2[20]; // creates an array of 20 of pointers to the struct
Then if you want to allocate structs into the array you would do something like:
PTestType array2[20]; // creates an array of 20 of pointers to the struct
// allocate memory for the structs and put their addresses into the array of pointers.
for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++) {
array2 [i] = malloc (sizeof(TestType));
}
C does not allow you to assign one array to another. You must instead use a loop to assign each element of one array to an element of the other.
EDIT: Another Interesting Approach
Another approach would be a more object oriented approach in which you encapsulate a few things. For instance using the same layers of types we create two types:
typedef struct _TestData {
struct {
int myData; // one or more data elements for each element of the pBlob array
} *pBlob;
int nStructs; // count of number of elements in the pBlob array
} TestData;
typedef TestData *PTestData;
Next we have a helper function which we use to create the object, named appropriately enough CreateTestData (int nArrayCount).
PTestData CreateTestData (int nCount)
{
PTestData ret;
// allocate the memory for the object. we allocate in a single piece of memory
// the management area as well as the array itself. We get the sizeof () the
// struct that is referenced through the pBlob member of TestData and multiply
// the size of the struct by the number of array elements we want to have.
ret = malloc (sizeof(TestData) + sizeof(*(ret->pBlob)) * nCount);
if (ret) { // make sure the malloc () worked.
// the actual array will begin after the end of the TestData struct
ret->pBlob = (void *)(ret + 1); // set the beginning of the array
ret->nStructs = nCount; // set the number of array elements
}
return ret;
}
Now we can use our new object as in the source code segment below. It should check that the pointer returned from CreateTestData() is valid however this is really just to show what could be done.
PTestData go = CreateTestData (20);
{
int i = 0;
for (i = 0; i < go->nStructs; i++) {
go->pBlob[i].myData = i;
}
}
In a truly dynamic environment you may also want to have a ReallocTestData(PTestData p) function that would reallocate a TestData object in order to modify the size of the array contained in the object.
With this approach, when you are done with a particular TestData object, you can just free the object as in free (go) and the object and its array are both freed at the same time.
Edit: Extending Further
With this encapsulated type we can now do a few other interesting things. For instance, we can have a copy function, PTestType CreateCopyTestData (PTestType pSrc) which would create a new instance and then copy the argument to a new object. In the following example, we reuse the function PTestType CreateTestData (int nCount) that will create an instance of our type, using the size of the object we are copying. After doing the create of the new object, we make a copy of the data from the source object. The final step is to fix up the pointer which in the source object points to its data area so that pointer in the new object now points to the data area of itself rather than the data area of the old object.
PTestType CreateCopyTestData (PTestType pSrc)
{
PTestType pReturn = 0;
if (pSrc) {
pReturn = CreateTestData (pSrc->nStructs);
if (pReturn) {
memcpy (pReturn, pSrc, sizeof(pTestType) + pSrc->nStructs * sizeof(*(pSrc->pBlob)));
pReturn->pBlob = (void *)(pReturn + 1); // set the beginning of the array
}
}
return pReturn;
}