I am dynamically allocating a struct which has a different struct as a member:
struct a {
// other members
struct b;
}
struct b basically holds a pointer to another struct b, so think of struct b as a linked list.
If I dynamically allocate struct a, then that would also make a new struct b within it. However, what is the difference between doing that or having struct a hold a pointer to struct b, and dynamically allocate struct b within struct a? What is the difference in implementation?
First, let's get some real definitions in place to make this concrete.
struct b {
int x;
};
struct a_with_b {
struct b b;
}
struct a_with_b_ptr {
struct b *bp;
}
When you encapsulate a struct, you just need to allocate the outer struct (and since the inner struct is not a pointer, you use . to reference members of the innert struct):
struct a_with_b *a1 = malloc(sizeof(struct a_with_b));
a1->b.x = 3;
But when you encapsulate a pointer, you have to allocate each independently and use -> when referencing members of the inner struct:
struct a_with_b_ptr *a2 = malloc(sizeof(struct a_with_b_ptr));
a1->b = malloc(sizeof(struct b));
a1->b->x = 3;
If you dynamically allocate (malloc) struct a as in
struct a *temp = (struct a *)malloc(sizeof(struct a));
you malloc space for a pointer to struct b (assuming that's what is in struct a) but you don't malloc space for struct b. That means later you'll have to do
temp->b = (struct b *)malloc(sizeof(struct b));
before you try and use struct b.
If you don't store a pointer to struct b but rather struct b directly then you'll get the automatic allocation when you define struct a.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With