473,409 Members | 1,935 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,409 software developers and data experts.

Pointer to Structure Casts

I am working with some code that is doing some pointer to structure
casts and I can't figure out how the cast is being done. Here is
basically the code.

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

typedef struct diffRecord
{
struct record *next[1];
} DiffRecord;

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
int value;
} Record;

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
Record *rec1 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
rec1->value = 5;

Record *rec2 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
rec2->value = 6;

rec1->next = rec2;
rec2->next = NULL;

DiffRecord *diffRec = ((DiffRecord*)rec1)->next[0];
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec;

printf("The value is: %i\n", testRec->value); //prints 6

free(rec1);
free(rec2);

return 0;
}

How is the pointer contained in record being coerced into the array in
the diffRecord structure?

Caleb Van Dyke

Nov 15 '05 #1
5 2294
On 20 Sep 2005 17:11:02 -0700, "ca***********@gmail.com"
<ca***********@gmail.com> wrote:
I am working with some code that is doing some pointer to structure
casts and I can't figure out how the cast is being done. Here is
basically the code.
The cast is being done by the statements that contain the casts. What
can't you figure out?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

typedef struct diffRecord
{
struct record *next[1];
} DiffRecord;

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
int value;
} Record;

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
Record *rec1 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
rec1->value = 5;

Record *rec2 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
Many C compilers do not allow definitions to follow executable
statements within a block. (It did not become a standard feature
until C99 and there aren't many C99 compilers in use.) By not putting
all your definitions at the start of the block you reduce the number
of people in the group who can help you.
rec2->value = 6;

rec1->next = rec2;
rec2->next = NULL;
You now have a linked list with two elements.

DiffRecord *diffRec = ((DiffRecord*)rec1)->next[0];
Take the value in rec1 which has the type pointer to Record and
convert it by whatever means is appropriate for your system to point
to the same address but with type pointer to DiffRecord. Since next
and next[] are the first members of their respective structs, you are
guaranteed there is no padding before them so this code will pick up
the pointer that has offset 0 into the struct.

This is a bad idea. It is probable that Record and DiffRecord have
the same alignment but why run the risk. If the value in rec1 is not
suitably aligned for a DiffRecord, this would invoke undefined
behavior.
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec;
Do the same thing in the opposite direction.

Since the standard requires all pointers to struct to have the same
size and representation, the value will always be the same address but
the type is changing.

printf("The value is: %i\n", testRec->value); //prints 6

free(rec1);
free(rec2);

return 0;
}

How is the pointer contained in record being coerced into the array in
the diffRecord structure?
It isn't. rec1 is being treated as if it points to a DiffRecord.
next[0] is a pointer which occupies the beginning of the struct. rec1
actually points to a Record. "It just so happens" that the beginning
of this struct is also occupied by a pointer of the same type.

It's still a lousy idea. If you change value from an int to a double
you would invoke undefined behavior on my system.

Caleb Van Dyke

<<Remove the del for email>>
Nov 15 '05 #2
<ca***********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@g49g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
I am working with some code that is doing some pointer to structure
casts and I can't figure out how the cast is being done. Here is
basically the code. .... typedef struct diffRecord
{
struct record *next[1];
} DiffRecord;

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
int value;
} Record;

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
Record *rec1 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
rec1->value = 5;

Record *rec2 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
rec2->value = 6;

rec1->next = rec2;
rec2->next = NULL;

DiffRecord *diffRec = ((DiffRecord*)rec1)->next[0];
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec;

printf("The value is: %i\n", testRec->value); //prints 6 .... How is the pointer contained in record being coerced into the array in
the diffRecord structure?


Here:
struct record *next[1];
struct record *next;
One struct contains array of 1 pointer.
The other contains 1 pointer, w/o being part of any array.
But, they both contain a pointer anyway, so there's no problem here. It's
not much different from the case when you have an array of 1 int and just 1
int, simply the type is different.
So, both structs contain in their beginning a pointer (or array of one
pointer -- doesn't matter how you think of it, in this particular case it's
essentially the same thing and from the memory's standpoint the two things
are equivalent)...
I can only say that this is a bit odd code... I'd expect this way of casting
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec;
rather than this
DiffRecord *diffRec = ((DiffRecord*)rec1)->next[0];
But you have both. What for?

Alex
Nov 15 '05 #3
Alexei A. Frounze wrote:
<ca***********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@g49g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
I am working with some code that is doing some pointer to structure
casts and I can't figure out how the cast is being done. Here is
basically the code.

...
typedef struct diffRecord
{
struct record *next[1];
} DiffRecord;

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
int value;
} Record;

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
Record *rec1 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
rec1->value = 5;

Record *rec2 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
rec2->value = 6;

rec1->next = rec2;
rec2->next = NULL;

DiffRecord *diffRec = ((DiffRecord*)rec1)->next[0];
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec;

printf("The value is: %i\n", testRec->value); //prints 6

...
How is the pointer contained in record being coerced into the array in
the diffRecord structure?


Here:
struct record *next[1];
struct record *next;
One struct contains array of 1 pointer.
The other contains 1 pointer, w/o being part of any array.
But, they both contain a pointer anyway, so there's no problem here. It's
not much different from the case when you have an array of 1 int and just 1
int, simply the type is different.
So, both structs contain in their beginning a pointer (or array of one
pointer -- doesn't matter how you think of it, in this particular case it's
essentially the same thing and from the memory's standpoint the two things
are equivalent)...
I can only say that this is a bit odd code... I'd expect this way of casting
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec;
rather than this
DiffRecord *diffRec = ((DiffRecord*)rec1)->next[0];
But you have both. What for?

Alex


This code actually is from another author. Their code looks something
like this:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

typedef struct diffRecord
{
struct diffRecord *next[2];
} DiffRecord;

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
struct record *previous;
int value;
} Record;

static void printValue(int index, Record *rec)
{
DiffRecord *diffRec = (DiffRecord*)rec;
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec->next[index];
printf("Value: %i\n", testRec->value);
}

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
Record *rec1 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
Record *rec2 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
Record *rec3 = malloc(sizeof(Record));

rec1->value = 5;
rec2->value = 6;
rec3->value = 7;

rec1->next = rec2;
rec1->previous = NULL;

rec2->previous = rec1;
rec2->next = rec3;

rec3->previous = rec2;
rec3->next = NULL;

printValue(0, rec2);
printValue(1, rec2);

free(rec3);
free(rec2);
free(rec1);

return 0;
}

Output:
Value: 7
Value: 5

I think their intention was for the parameter index in printValue() to
be some sort of selector for the pointers in the rec parameter. The
haven't seen a cast like this before but I am assuming that this works
becuase the first two parameters of Record are pointers?

If say Record looks like this:

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
int value;
struct record *previous;
} Record;

and I cast struct record to a struct diffRecord would I get some
undefined behaviour trying to access next[1] field of diffRecord?

Thanks for the help,
Caleb Van Dyke

Nov 15 '05 #4
On 21 Sep 2005 17:27:45 -0700, "ca***********@gmail.com"
<ca***********@gmail.com> wrote:

snip ~60 lines of code you now tell us is irrelevant. Please trim
your posts.

This code actually is from another author. Their code looks something
like this:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

typedef struct diffRecord
{
struct diffRecord *next[2];
next[0] will be followed immediately by next[1].
} DiffRecord;

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
struct record *previous;
But there is no guarantee that previous immediately follows next in
the memory occupied buy such a structure.
int value;
} Record;

static void printValue(int index, Record *rec)
{
DiffRecord *diffRec = (DiffRecord*)rec;
Record *testRec = (Record*)diffRec->next[index];
printf("Value: %i\n", testRec->value);
This is still crappy code that could be solved without risk of
undefined behavior by code like
testRec = index ? rec->previous : rec->next;
}

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
Record *rec1 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
Record *rec2 = malloc(sizeof(Record));
Record *rec3 = malloc(sizeof(Record));

rec1->value = 5;
rec2->value = 6;
rec3->value = 7;

rec1->next = rec2;
rec1->previous = NULL;

rec2->previous = rec1;
rec2->next = rec3;

rec3->previous = rec2;
rec3->next = NULL;

printValue(0, rec2);
printValue(1, rec2);

free(rec3);
free(rec2);
free(rec1);

return 0;
}

Output:
Value: 7
Value: 5

I think their intention was for the parameter index in printValue() to
be some sort of selector for the pointers in the rec parameter. The
haven't seen a cast like this before but I am assuming that this works
becuase the first two parameters of Record are pointers?

If say Record looks like this:

typedef struct record
{
struct record *next;
int value;
struct record *previous;
} Record;

and I cast struct record to a struct diffRecord would I get some
undefined behaviour trying to access next[1] field of diffRecord?


Absolutely.
<<Remove the del for email>>
Nov 15 '05 #5
Barry Schwarz wrote:
On 21 Sep 2005 17:27:45 -0700, "ca***********@gmail.com"
<ca***********@gmail.com> wrote:

snip ~60 lines of code you now tell us is irrelevant. Please trim
your posts.


Sorry it's so long. I was trying to be concise. Thanks for answering my
question, but why do you think I am saying this is irrelevant? I was
trying to figure out the behavior of structure members when they are
cast to another structure. I only posted the revised code to show why
this weird cast was being done.

Caleb Van Dyke

Nov 15 '05 #6

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

3
by: Robert Street | last post by:
Hi! I'm rather new at c++ and I'm totally confused with this kind of typecasting: typedef signed char int8_t; typedef signed short int16_t; typedef struct broadcast_hdr {
22
by: Alex Fraser | last post by:
From searching Google Groups, I understand that void pointer arithmetic is a constraint violation, which is understandable. However, generic functions like qsort() and bsearch() must in essence do...
3
by: joe bruin | last post by:
hello all. i am trying to get rid of some warnings and do "the right thing". although in this particular case, i am not sure what the right thing is. the code: typedef struct {
3
by: Mr. X | last post by:
Hello all, Please advise... Consider the following... void init_sockaddr (struct sockaddr_in *name, const char *hostname,int port) { struct hostent *hostinfo; name->sin_family = AF_INET;
26
by: Alfonso Morra | last post by:
Hi, I'm getting a compiler error of "pointer truncation from 'void *' to 'int'" because I'm not explicitly casting from void* to (datatype*). Pointers are stored as ints (is that right?), so as...
40
by: Steve Rencontre | last post by:
I can't for the life of me see how to do pointer-to-member when the member is actually part of an embedded structure. That is, if I have: struct S1 { int a; }; struct S2 { S1 s; int b; }; ...
27
by: Erik de Castro Lopo | last post by:
Hi all, The GNU C compiler allows a void pointer to be incremented and the behaviour is equivalent to incrementing a char pointer. Is this legal C99 or is this a GNU C extention? Thanks in...
49
by: elmar | last post by:
Hi Clers, If I look at my ~200000 lines of C code programmed over the past 15 years, there is one annoying thing in this smart language, which somehow reduces the 'beauty' of the source code...
17
by: Ivan K. | last post by:
I am looking at some legacy code, which begins by allocating a double matrix with the dmatrix() function from NRC as follows: double **A, **augin, **augout, **aa; A = dmatrix(1,...
0
by: emmanuelkatto | last post by:
Hi All, I am Emmanuel katto from Uganda. I want to ask what challenges you've faced while migrating a website to cloud. Please let me know. Thanks! Emmanuel
1
by: nemocccc | last post by:
hello, everyone, I want to develop a software for my android phone for daily needs, any suggestions?
1
by: Sonnysonu | last post by:
This is the data of csv file 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 the lengths should be different i have to store the data by column-wise with in the specific length. suppose the i have to...
0
by: Hystou | last post by:
There are some requirements for setting up RAID: 1. The motherboard and BIOS support RAID configuration. 2. The motherboard has 2 or more available SATA protocol SSD/HDD slots (including MSATA, M.2...
0
marktang
by: marktang | last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However,...
0
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can...
0
by: Hystou | last post by:
Overview: Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows...
0
agi2029
by: agi2029 | last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing,...
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.