468,510 Members | 1,755 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 468,510 developers. It's quick & easy.

String array() in C

Hey,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2
3
4
5

May 7 '07 #1
12 43166
Here is the compelte message

Hi,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2 word3
3 word4
4 word5
5 word6
--------------------

I was thinking to use char**, but I don't want to use double pointer,
if there an easy way to get around this?

Thanks.

May 7 '07 #2

<Ja********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11*********************@h2g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
Here is the compelte message

Hi,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2 word3
3 word4
4 word5
5 word6
--------------------

I was thinking to use char**, but I don't want to use double pointer,
if there an easy way to get around this?
No. You can declare an array of pointers, but really the array is just a
char ** dressed up with different syntax.
If don't know how many string you need at run time

char **list;
int N;

and malloc() is the way to go.
If you do

char *list[N];

is OK.

However you very rarely need raw tables of strings. Usually the string is
tied to something. So
struct mydata
{
char *word;
int value;
double value2;
};

where value and value2 are arbitrary things, eg counts, associated with each
"word", is more common.
--
Free games and programming goodies.
http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm

May 7 '07 #3
Ja********@gmail.com wrote:
Here is the compelte message

Hi,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2 word3
3 word4
4 word5
5 word6
--------------------

I was thinking to use char**, but I don't want to use double pointer,
if there an easy way to get around this?
Is your number of strings fixed, or variable?


Brian

May 7 '07 #4
Ja********@gmail.com wrote On 05/07/07 13:31,:
Here is the compelte message

Hi,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2 word3
3 word4
4 word5
5 word6
--------------------

I was thinking to use char**, but I don't want to use double pointer,
if there an easy way to get around this?
There are several approaches with different advantages
and disadvantages. You haven't specified your needs very
precisely, so I'll just sketch out a few methods. Note that
these are NOT equivalent!
/* Fixed-length array of fixed-length words (any
* short words are followed by extra '\0' bytes
* to a total size of six). Array elements are
* modifiable, but no word can grow beyond five
* payload characters.
*/
char words[][5+1] = { "word1", ..., "word6", };
/* Fixed-length array of pointers to words of
* arbitrary length. The pointers can be changed
* to point at different words, but the original
* word data cannot be changes.
*/
char *words[] = { "word1", ..., "word6", };
/* Fixed-length array of pointers to words of
* arbitrary length. Both the pointers and the
* words can be changed, but the original words
* cannot be lengthened in place.
*/
char word1[] = "word1";
...
char word6[] = "word6";
char *words[] = { word1, ..., word6, };
/* Dynamically allocated "array" of fixed-length
* words. Array elements are modifiable, but the
* words themselves cannot be lengthened. The
* typedef is for clarity, and can be eliminated.
*/
typedef char Word[5+1];
Word *words = malloc(N * sizeof *words);
if (words != NULL) {
strcpy (words[0], "word1");
...
strcpy (words[5], "word6");
}
/* Dynamically-allocated "array" of pointers to
* dynamically-allocated words. Everything is
* modifiable, replaceable, extensible, all-
* singing, all-dancing, and carbon-neutral.
*/
char **words = malloc(N * sizeof *words);
if (words != NULL) {
words[0] = malloc(sizeof "word1");
if (words[0] != NULL)
strcpy (words[0], "word1");
...
/* A different way to calculate the size: */
words[5] = malloc(strlen("word6") + 1);
if (words[5] != NULL)
strcpy (words[5], "word6");
}

--
Er*********@sun.com
May 7 '07 #5
Ja********@gmail.com wrote:
Hey,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2
3
4
5
char array_of_strings[6][6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* in your restricted
chase. The strings are modifiable. */

char *array_of_strings[] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* More generally, but
the strings must be copied elsewhere if you want to use modified forms
of them, although the pointers can be modified. */

char *array_of_strings[6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* If you must have six
strings, and string literals are not a problem. */

May 7 '07 #6
Malcolm McLean wrote:
>
<Ja********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11*********************@h2g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
[...]
>I was thinking to use char**, but I don't want to use double pointer,
if there an easy way to get around this?
No. You can declare an array of pointers, but really the array is just a
char ** dressed up with different syntax.
This is wrong. Malcolm has been around long enough to know that a
pointer is not an array, and a pointer to a pointer is not the same as
an array of pointers. And he has been around long enough to know that
lying to seekers after knowledge is not welcome here.

May 7 '07 #7
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.netwrites:
Ja********@gmail.com wrote:
>Hey,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2
3
4
5

char array_of_strings[6][6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* in your
restricted chase. The strings are modifiable. */
That is disgusting code.
>
char *array_of_strings[] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* More generally, but
the strings must be copied elsewhere if you want to use modified forms
of them, although the pointers can be modified. */
Which pointers? No "pointers" can be modified.
>
char *array_of_strings[6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* If you must have
six strings, and string literals are not a problem. */
Misleading. If you are going to use "six" then specify all the strings.
--
May 7 '07 #8
Richard <rg****@gmail.comwrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.netwrites:
Ja********@gmail.com wrote:
I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2
3
4
5
char array_of_strings[6][6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* in your
restricted chase. The strings are modifiable. */
That is disgusting code.
Why? Perhaps an array of 6 strings, each long enough to hold 6 chars
is exactly what the OP needs. The problem is that underspecified that
this could be just the correct solution. But since that's not clear,
Mr. Ambuhl continued with:
char *array_of_strings[] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* More generally, but
the strings must be copied elsewhere if you want to use modified forms
of them, although the pointers can be modified. */
Which pointers? No "pointers" can be modified.
What are you talking about?
char *array_of_strings[] = {"word1", "word2"};
defines an array of two pointers to char arrays and those pointers
can be modified, i.e. made to point to other strings (or char
arrays to be precise).
char *array_of_strings[6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* If you must have
six strings, and string literals are not a problem. */
Misleading. If you are going to use "six" then specify all the strings.
Which would you use, going by what the OP wrote? Invent some?

Regards, Jens
--
\ Jens Thoms Toerring ___ jt@toerring.de
\__________________________ http://toerring.de
May 7 '07 #9
On May 8, 7:31 am, Martin Ambuhl <mamb...@earthlink.netwrote:
Malcolm McLean wrote:
[rubbish confusing arrays and pointers]

This is wrong. Malcolm has been around long enough to know that a
pointer is not an array, and a pointer to a pointer is not the same as
an array of pointers. And he has been around long enough to know that
lying to seekers after knowledge is not welcome here.
Are you sure he is lying? Perhaps he is just mistaken. With the
the number of wrong posts he makes each day (even more than
I do!), it would be quite a tour-de-force of trollage.

May 7 '07 #10
In article <5a*************@mid.uni-berlin.de>,
Jens Thoms Toerring <jt@toerring.dewrote:
char *array_of_strings[6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* If you must have
six strings, and string literals are not a problem. */
>Misleading. If you are going to use "six" then specify all the strings.

Which would you use, going by what the OP wrote? Invent some?
It appears that the OP inadvertently sent the article before he finished
it. He followed up with a complete version that included six strings.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
May 7 '07 #11
Richard wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.netwrites:
>Ja********@gmail.com wrote:
>>Hey,

I need a structure to store a string array in c, for example

Index Content
-------- -----------
0 word1
1 word2
2
3
4
5
char array_of_strings[6][6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* in your
restricted chase. The strings are modifiable. */

That is disgusting code.
Perhaps you could explain what aesthetic criterion leads you to such an
idiosyncratic claim.
>char *array_of_strings[] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* More generally, but
the strings must be copied elsewhere if you want to use modified forms
of them, although the pointers can be modified. */

Which pointers? No "pointers" can be modified.
array_of_strings is an array of pointer, all of which can be modified.
Perhaps you could explain what strange language standard leads you to
such an idiosyncratic claim.

>
>char *array_of_strings[6] = {"word1", "word2"}; /* If you must have
six strings, and string literals are not a problem. */

Misleading. If you are going to use "six" then specify all the strings.
If you knew your ass from a whole in the ground, you would know
a) the initialization is complete and
b) contains all the information in the original poster's message. To
pretend that one "knows" what the other strings are is a misleading
claim of mind-reading; to pretend that the initialization requires 6
explict initialisers is misleading and untrue.

Perhaps you could explain what leads you to such an absurd and
idiosyncratic claim.

May 7 '07 #12
Old Wolf wrote:
On May 8, 7:31 am, Martin Ambuhl <mamb...@earthlink.netwrote:
>Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>[rubbish confusing arrays and pointers]
This is wrong. Malcolm has been around long enough to know that a
pointer is not an array, and a pointer to a pointer is not the same as
an array of pointers. And he has been around long enough to know that
lying to seekers after knowledge is not welcome here.

Are you sure he is lying? Perhaps he is just mistaken. With the
the number of wrong posts he makes each day (even more than
I do!), it would be quite a tour-de-force of trollage.
I think you're on to something here Wolf. :-)

--
Joe Wright
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
--- Albert Einstein ---
May 8 '07 #13

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

16 posts views Thread by Don Starr | last post: by
7 posts views Thread by al | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by songkv | last post: by
22 posts views Thread by spike | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by Simon Schaap | last post: by
8 posts views Thread by Jeff Johnson | last post: by
17 posts views Thread by Chad Myers | last post: by
11 posts views Thread by Zordiac | last post: by
14 posts views Thread by Shhnwz.a | last post: by
1 post views Thread by fmendoza | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.