Hiding identifiers of the header from other parts of the program

Hello,
I have written two functions NewMalloc() and NewFree() which are similar to malloc() and free(). They have a global variable of 50000 byte array and its where the memory is allocated dynamically. Everything is written in C , (not C++)

my problem is that i have givent this array, the name(identifier) "NEWMALLOC_mem" which will not allow me to use this word as an identifier in my programs that use these two functions.
(for now, the two functions, macros and the global variable are written in a file called newmalloc.c which is to be linked with my programs).

in C++ this can be solved by using Namespace... but i want this on C..

please help me...

Thanks..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deamonpog

my problem is that i have givent this array, the name(identifier) "NEWMALLOC_mem" which will not allow me to use this word as an identifier in my programs that use these two functions.
(for now, the two functions, macros and the global variable are written in a file called newmalloc.c which is to be linked with my programs).

What exactly is the name conflict? The solution is simply to change one or both of the names, e.g., by using a prefix.

So don't put that variable name in the header. There's no reason to, anyway; just put it in the .c file only and everybody will be happy.

There is no namespace equivalent in C. The best you can probably do is prefixing the name with something, like foo_NEWMALLOC_mem instead of the C++ foo::NEWMALLOC_mem.

I think the more important question is why would you want to use NEWMALLOC_mem as an identifier in the rest of your program? One, it sounds like you're using a global here, which is fine since you need access to the memory throughout the duration of the program, but it should probably be a static global, accessible only in newmalloc.c. Two, any pointer to memory "allocated" with NewMalloc should only get it's address from NewMalloc, and should never address NEWMALLOC_mem directly.

In your .c file, you have

Code:

static char NEWMALLOC_mem[50000];

well, i just want this to be perfect.. the whole thing works very good.. and only thing is this.. i used this "NEWMALLOC_" as the prefix as u can see... so thats how the array name ended up as "NEWMALLOC_mem"..

i just want to know if there is another way to hide this..

namespace in C++ do this in a good way... that we have to put "::" to call something inside a namespace..
i was wondering if there is a way i can do it with C.
(or at least you can tell me how its done inside of c++...)

Thank you all for quick replies....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deamonpog

well, i just want this to be perfect.. the whole thing works very good.. and only thing is this.. i used this "NEWMALLOC_" as the prefix as u can see... so thats how the array name ended up as "NEWMALLOC_mem"..

i just want to know if there is another way to hide this..

namespace in C++ do this in a good way... that we have to put "::" to call something inside a namespace..
i was wondering if there is a way i can do it with C.
(or at least you can tell me how its done inside of c++...)

Thank you all for quick replies....

As we say, if it's not in the header file, then as far as anybody else is concerned it doesn't exist. What more could you possibly ask for?

This is what my code looks... i ddnt copy pastet the codes inside the functions because they are too long(about 300 lines)... i will put them if u want it....
i dont need the word static rite?

Code:

#include <stdio.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <errno.h> #ifndef NEWMALLOC_H #define NEWMALLOC_H /*-- PREPROCESSOR SUBSTITIUTIONS --*/ // Core Basics #define MEMSIZE 50000 // Size of the Memory.(maximum is 65534, better to be an Even) #define MAS 8 // Minimum Allocation Size Permited in Bytes. #define MALLOCDATA 8 // Size of the data section of the Memory in Bytes. // Pointers in Data Section #define FREEHEAD 0 // Head Pointer #define SIZE 1 // Local Variable for storing the size #define PREVIOUS 2 // Previous Pointer #define CURRENT 3 // Current Pointer // nested(2nd level) directives #define ARRAYSIZE (MEMSIZE/2) #define MAXALLOWEDSIZE (MEMSIZE - MALLOCDATA) #define ENDOFNEXT MEMSIZE // End of Next links /*-- MEMORY DEFINITION AND DATA SECTION INITIALIZATION --*/ /* ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- initialize to, [FREEHEAD][SIZE][PREVIOUS][CURRENT][B_Next][B_Prev][B_Free][].....[] FREEHEAD = MALLOCDATA+4 SIZE = 0 PREVIOUS = 0 CURRENT = 0 B_Next = ENDOFNEXT // end of Next links B_Prev = 0 // end of Prev links B_Free = 0 // end of Free links ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- */ unsigned short NEWMALLOC_mem[ARRAYSIZE] = { (MALLOCDATA+4), 0, 0, 0, ENDOFNEXT, 0, 0}; void * NewMalloc(size_t size) { // long code } void NewFree(void * location) { // long code } #endif

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deamonpog

well, i just want this to be perfect.. the whole thing works very good.. and only thing is this.. i used this "NEWMALLOC_" as the prefix as u can see... so thats how the array name ended up as "NEWMALLOC_mem"..

i just want to know if there is another way to hide this..

namespace in C++ do this in a good way... that we have to put "::" to call something inside a namespace..
i was wondering if there is a way i can do it with C.
(or at least you can tell me how its done inside of c++...)

Bah, I misread you. I think tabstop gave you the first step of the solution and Salem completed it.

Basically, one possible problem is that you are defining the array in the header file, thus it is defined in many translation units (i.e., each combination of that header and a source file in which the header is included), which is a Bad Thing. You should define the array in exactly one source file, i.e., the one in which you implement NewMalloc() and NewFree().

But you don't even need to refer to NEWMALLOC_mem in the header at all. Yet, your next worry is that if somehow the name NEWMALLOC_mem is used somewhere else, perhaps accidentally or coincidentally, there will be a conflict. The solution is to declare the array static, as per Salem's example. This way, another use of the NEWMALLOC_mem name would not conflict. Since you know about C++ namespaces, note that this technique is akin to the use of an unnamed namespace.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deamonpog

This is what my code looks... i ddnt copy pastet the codes inside the functions because they are too long(about 300 lines)... i will put them if u want it....
i dont need the word static rite?

Code:

#include <stdio.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <errno.h> #ifndef NEWMALLOC_H #define NEWMALLOC_H /*-- PREPROCESSOR SUBSTITIUTIONS --*/ // Core Basics #define MEMSIZE 50000 // Size of the Memory.(maximum is 65534, better to be an Even) #define MAS 8 // Minimum Allocation Size Permited in Bytes. #define MALLOCDATA 8 // Size of the data section of the Memory in Bytes. // Pointers in Data Section #define FREEHEAD 0 // Head Pointer #define SIZE 1 // Local Variable for storing the size #define PREVIOUS 2 // Previous Pointer #define CURRENT 3 // Current Pointer // nested(2nd level) directives #define ARRAYSIZE (MEMSIZE/2) #define MAXALLOWEDSIZE (MEMSIZE - MALLOCDATA) #define ENDOFNEXT MEMSIZE // End of Next links /*-- MEMORY DEFINITION AND DATA SECTION INITIALIZATION --*/ /* ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- initialize to, [FREEHEAD][SIZE][PREVIOUS][CURRENT][B_Next][B_Prev][B_Free][].....[] FREEHEAD = MALLOCDATA+4 SIZE = 0 PREVIOUS = 0 CURRENT = 0 B_Next = ENDOFNEXT // end of Next links B_Prev = 0 // end of Prev links B_Free = 0 // end of Free links ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- */ unsigned short NEWMALLOC_mem[ARRAYSIZE] = { (MALLOCDATA+4), 0, 0, 0, ENDOFNEXT, 0, 0}; void * NewMalloc(size_t size) { // long code } void NewFree(void * location) { // long code } #endif

Half a jiff -- is this your header file (since you have an include guard at the top)? That's not at all what a header file should look like. A header file for this should look roughly like

Code:

#ifndef NEWMALLOC_H #define NEWMALLOC_H void * NewMalloc(size_t size); void NewFree(void * location); #endif

...and that's it. Prototypes for the function is pretty much all you want for a header. All that code should go in a .c file, which is compiled separately from the program that uses it (if you're being fancy about it) or at the same time as your program (if you're being less fancy).

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabstop

As we say, if it's not in the header file, then as far as anybody else is concerned it doesn't exist. What more could you possibly ask for?

sorry, i dont understand what you say.... maybe its my weak english.. pardon me... can u explain....

what i said was that i want to use the same name( NEWMALLOC_mem) inside a program for another variable, but the program will also use this NewMalloc function. so it will make an error rite?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deamonpog

what i said was that i want to use the same name( NEWMALLOC_mem) inside a program for another variable, but the program will also use this NewMalloc function. so it will make an error rite?

It depends. For example, if you declare another variable named NEWMALLOC_mem as a local variable in the main function, it would actually be fine. The problem comes if you declare another global variable named NEWMALLOC_mem. This is mostly a theoretical problem since you are already using a prefix to the name, and global variables should be rare anyway, but the solution, as demonstrated by Salem in post #5 and reiterated by me in post #9, is to declare this global array as static.

Quote:

Originally Posted by laserlight

It depends. For example, if you declare another variable named NEWMALLOC_mem as a local variable in the main function, it would actually be fine. The problem comes if you declare another global variable named NEWMALLOC_mem. This is mostly a theoretical problem since you are already using a prefix to the name, and global variables should be rare anyway, but the solution, as demonstrated by Salem in post #5 and reiterated by me in post #9, is to declare this global array as static.

Ok, so will using static keyword solve the problem completely? i dont know about it very much.. :( so now i will look at it...

thanks everybody for helping me.. thank you very much..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deamonpog

Ok, so will using static keyword solve the problem completely?

Yes, but you also have to move the definition of the array to the source file. If you leave it in the header, then each source file that includes the header will have its own version of the array, which is not what you want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by laserlight

Yes, but you also have to move the definition of the array to the source file. If you leave it in the header, then each source file that includes the header will have its own version of the array, which is not what you want.

oh... thank you very much for that information too...
also i tried it... yah... it works great... thanks....