CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c++cpointerscharpointer-arithmetic
Matt Joiner
Matt Joiner

Reputation: 118600

Cleaner pointer arithmetic syntax for manipulation with byte offsets

In the following lines of code, I need to adjust the pointer pm by an offset in bytes in one of its fields. Is there an better/easier way to do this, than incessantly casting back and forth from char * and PartitionMap * such that the pointer arithmetic still works out?

PartitionMap *pm(reinterpret_cast<PartitionMap *>(partitionMaps));
for ( ; index > 0 ; --index)
{
    pm = (PartitionMap *)(((char *)pm) + pm->partitionMapLength);
}
return pm;

For those that can't grok from the code, it's looping through variable length descriptors in a buffer that inherit from PartitionMap.

Also for those concerned, partitionMapLength always returns lengths that are supported by the system this runs on. The data I'm traversing conforms to the UDF specification.

Upvotes: 1

Views: 1287

Answers (7)

caf
caf

Reputation: 239181

You can of course just keep two variables around: a char * to step through the buffer and a PartitionMap * to access it. Makes it a little clearer what's going on.

for (char *ptr = ??, pm = (PartitionMap *)ptr ; index > 0 ; --index)
{
    ptr += pm->partitionMapLength;
    pm = (PartitionMap *)ptr;
}
return pm;

Upvotes: 3

Michael Burr
Michael Burr

Reputation: 340316

As others have mentioned you need the casts, but you can hide the ugliness in a macro or function. However, one other thing to keep in mind is alignment requirements. On most processors you can't simply increment a pointer to a type by an arbitrary number of bytes and cast the result back into a pointer to the original type without problems accessing the struct through the new pointer due to misalignment.

One of the few architectures (even if it is about the most popular) that will let you get away with it is the x86 architecture. However, even if you're writing for Windows, you'll want to take this problem into account - Win64 does enforce alignment requirements.

So even accessing the partitionMapLength member through the pointer might crash your program.

You might be able to easily work around this problem using a compiler extension like __unaligned on Windows:

PartitionMap __unaliged *pm(reinterpret_cast<PartitionMap *>(partitionMaps));
for ( ; index > 0 ; --index)
{
    pm = (PartitionMap __unaligned *)(((char *)pm) + pm->partitionMapLength);
}
return pm;

Or you can copy the potentially unaligned data into a properly aligned struct:

PartitionMap *pm(reinterpret_cast<PartitionMap *>(partitionMaps));

char* p = reinterpret_cast<char*>( pm);

ParititionMap tmpMap;
for ( ; index > 0 ; --index)
{

    p += pm->partitionMapLength;

    memcpy( &tmpMap, p, sizeof( newMap));
    pm = &tmpMap;
}

// you may need a more spohisticated copy to return something useful
size_t siz = pm->partitionMapLength;
pm = reinterpret_cast<PartitionMap*>( malloc( siz));
if (pm) {
    memcpy( pm, p, siz);
}
return pm;

Upvotes: 1

Max Lybbert
Max Lybbert

Reputation: 20039

Both C and C++ allow you to iterate through an array via pointers and ++:

#include <iostream>

int[] arry = { 0, 1, 2, 3 };
int* ptr = arry;
while (*ptr != 3) {
    std::cout << *ptr << '\n';
    ++ptr;
}

For this to work, adding to pointers is defined to take the memory address stored in the pointer and then add the sizeof whatever the type is times the value being added. For instance, in our example ++ptr adds 1 * sizeof(int) to the memory address stored in ptr.

If you have a pointer to a type, and want to advance a particular number of bytes from that spot, the only way to do so is to cast to char* (because sizeof(char) is defined to be one).

Upvotes: 0

AndersK
AndersK

Reputation: 36102

What is puzzling me is why you have 'partitionMapLength' in bytes?

Wouldn't it be better if it was in 'partitionMap' units since you anyway cast it?

PartitionMap *pmBase(reinterpret_cast<PartitionMap *>(partitionMaps));
PartitionMap *pm;
...
pm = pmBase + index; // just guessing about your 'index' variable here

Upvotes: 0

Evan Teran
Evan Teran

Reputation: 90493

I often use these templates for this:

    template<typename T>
    T *add_pointer(T *p, unsigned int n) {
            return reinterpret_cast<T *>(reinterpret_cast<char *>(p) + n);
    }

    template<typename T>
    const T *add_pointer(const T *p, unsigned int n) {
            return reinterpret_cast<const T *>(reinterpret_cast<const char *>(p) + n);
    }

They maintain the type, but add single bytes to them, for example:

T *x = add_pointer(x, 1); // increments x by one byte, regardless of the type of x

Upvotes: 5

Norman Ramsey
Norman Ramsey

Reputation: 202615

The casting has to be done, but it makes the code nearly unreadable. For readability's sake, isolate it in a static inline function.

Upvotes: 0

Jim Buck
Jim Buck

Reputation: 20724

Casting is the only way, whether it's to a char* or intptr_t or other some such type, and then to your final type.

Upvotes: 5

Related Questions