Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Date | 2012-09-29 19:18 +0100 |
|---|---|
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation |
| References | <zZKdnQK8KpXJSPvNnZ2dnUVZ8u6dnZ2d@bt.com> <k46rip$v8g$1@dont-email.me> |
| Message-ID | <-KOdnVXFPIH_pvrNnZ2dnUVZ7s-dnZ2d@bt.com> (permalink) |
On 29/09/12 14:03, Eric Sosman wrote: > On 9/29/2012 7:02 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >> [...] [snip] > Either way, your > program is not just living on the edge, it's fallen over. :-( ah well, he who never made a mistake never made anything. At least I think that's how it goes. [snip] > > It looks like you wanted to initialize `foos' to point at the > beginning of an array of `x' (or more) memory locations that each > can hold a `struct foo*': > > foos -> [0] -> first malloc() result > [1] -> second malloc() result > ... > [x-1] -> final malloc() result What I was actually trying to do was to come up with some way to allow the addition of new instances of foo at runtime without having to know how many I would eventually need. What I actually need is a linked list, this is trivial to implement and I don't know why I didn't just go for that ... trying new things hoping to discover a better way of doing things I suppose, anyway ... > One way to do this would be > > foos = malloc(x * sizeof(struct foo*)); > > or equivalently (and usually better) > > foos = malloc(x * sizeof *foos); These methods all appear to require knowing the value of x at compile time. I noticed that int main(int argc, char *argv[]) could also be written int main(int argc, char **argv) I suppose I was trying to reproduce this for pointers to struct foo > But you neglected to do any such thing, and that's probably the > root of your trouble. Probably, now that you point it out. Thanks for taking the time to reply, it's much appreciated. lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
(newbie) question concerning memory allocation lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-09-29 12:02 +0100
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-09-29 09:03 -0400
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-09-29 19:18 +0100
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-09-29 14:52 -0400
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2012-09-29 11:56 -0700
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-09-29 20:34 +0100
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2012-09-29 14:28 -0700
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-29 15:40 -0700
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2012-09-30 12:21 -0700
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-01 08:35 +0100
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-10 23:38 +0300
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-29 14:11 +0100
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-09-29 19:47 +0100
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-29 20:47 +0100
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-29 14:43 -0700
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Anand Hariharan <mailto.anand.hariharan@gmail.com> - 2012-10-10 15:15 -0700
Re: (newbie) question concerning memory allocation Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-09-29 15:48 -0600
csiph-web