Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Why is char[][] = {{...}, {...}} not possible if explicitly given a multidimensional array?

Tags:

I went through this article. I understand the rules explained but I am wondering what exactly blocks the compiler from accepting the following syntax when defining a constant multi-dimensional array and directly initializing it with known values of given type:

const int multi_arr1[][] = {{1,2,3}, {1,2,3}}; // why not? const int multi_arr2[][3] = {{1,2,3}, {1,2,3}}; // OK  error: declaration of 'multi_arr1' as multidimensional array must have bounds        for all dimensions except the first 

What prevents the compiler from looking to the right and realizing that we are dealing with 3 elements for each "subarray" or possibly returning an error only for cases when the programmer passes e.g. a different number of elements for each subarray like {1,2,3}, {1,2,3,4}?

For example when dealing with a 1D char array the compiler can look at the string on the right hand side of = and this is valid:

const char str[] = "Str"; 

I would like to understand what's happening so that the compiler is not able to deduce the array dimensions and calculate the size for allocation since now it seems to me like the compiler has all the information needed to do so. What am I missing here?

like image 906
esgaldir Avatar asked Feb 19 '18 11:02

esgaldir


1 Answers

Requiring the compiler to infer inner dimensions from the initializers would require the compiler to work retroactively in a way the standard avoids.

The standard allows objects being initialized to refer to themselves. For example:

struct foo { struct foo *next; int value; } head = { &head, 0 }; 

This defines a node of a linked list that points to itself initially. (Presumably, more nodes would be inserted later.) This is valid because C 2011 [N1570] 6.2.1 7 says the identifier head “has scope that begins just after the completion of its declarator.” A declarator is the part of the grammar of a declaration that includes the identifier name along with the array, function, and/or pointer parts of the declaration (for example, f(int, float) and *a[3] are declarators, in a declarations such as float f(int, float) or int *a[3]).

Because of 6.2.1 7, a programmer could write this definition:

void *p[][1] = { { p[1] }, { p[0] } }; 

Consider the initializer p[1]. This is an array, so it is automatically converted to a pointer to its first element, p[1][0]. The compiler knows that address because it knows p[i] is an array of 1 void * (for any value of i). If the compiler did not know how big p[i] was, it could not calculate this address. So, if the C standard allowed us to write:

void *p[][] = { { p[1] }, { p[0] } }; 

then the compiler would have to continue scanning past p[1] so it can count the number of initializers given for the second dimension (just one in this case, but we have to scan at least to the } to see that, and it could be many more), then go back and calculate the value of p[1].

The standard avoids forcing compilers to do this sort of multiple-pass work. Requiring compilers to infer the inner dimensions would violate this goal, so the standard does not do it.

(In fact, I think the standard might not require the compiler to do any more than a finite amount of look-ahead, possibly just a few characters during tokenization and a single token while parsing the grammar, but I am not sure. Some things have values not known until link time, such as void (*p)(void) = &SomeFunction;, but those are filled in by the linker.)

Additionally, consider a definition such as:

char x[][] =     {         {  0,  1 },         { 10, 11 },         { 20, 21, 22 }     }; 

As the compiler reads the first two lines of initial values, it may want to prepare a copy of the array in memory. So, when it reads the first line, it will store two values. Then it sees the line end, so it can assume for the moment the inner dimension is 2, forming char x[][2]. When it sees the second line, it allocates more memory (as with realloc) and continues, storing the next two values, 10 and 11, in their appropriate places.

When it reads the third line and sees 22, it realizes the inner dimension is at least three. Now the compiler cannot simply allocate more memory. It has to rearrange where 10 and 11 are in memory relative to 0 and 1, because there is a new element between them; x[0][2] now exists and has a value of 0 (so far). So requiring the compile to infer the inner dimensions while also allowing different numbers of initializers in each subarray (and inferring the inner dimension based on the maximum number of initializers seen throughout the entire list) can burden the compiler with a lot of memory motion.

like image 188
Eric Postpischil Avatar answered Sep 16 '22 22:09

Eric Postpischil