Thread: Copy array into pointer

I have written this code, and at first glance it does what I want, however I am worried that a) I am overwriting the array that is apssed from chord.getPattern() b) Im getting a memory leak that I want to get rid of, and c) is there generally a /what is the neater way to do it:

Code:

uint8_t* ChordBuilder::invert(uint8_t count, Chord chord) {
	temp = chord.getPattern();
	chord.invert(true);
	//TODO count is how many times to invert. Moves root aswell however

	for (uint8_t i = 0; i < count; i++){
		temp = doInversion(temp, chord.getSize());
	}
	return temp;
}

uint8_t* ChordBuilder::doInversion(uint8_t* pattern, uint8_t size) {

	temp = new uint8_t[size];
	temp[0] = pattern[1];
	for (int i = 1; i < size - 1; i++) {
		temp[i] = pattern[i + 1];
	}
	temp[size - 1] = pattern[0] + 12;
	return temp;
}

temp is a member variable of ChordBuilder - and is expressed as:

Code:

 uint8_t* temp;

I dont want the pattern that chord stores, and passes with getPattern() to change - I fear it is at the moment?
I would rather not use the "new" but I cant think how to get rid of it, however Im not sure where I would need to put the "delete"?

Thanks
Alex

Cool, a music program!

So doInversion moves all the "notes" down one element in the array, then takes the first note of the original array and puts it last, but an octave (12 semitones) higher. I.e., it calculates the next chord inversion.

But because "temp" is a member variable (but why?), and you're using it for two purposes, you lose what is essentially the input to doInversion as soon as you assign the new array to temp.

I'd remove temp as a member variable (the name alone is a clue that it's not really a member), and make it a local variable to each function.

It doesn't look to me that the pattern that chord stores is necessarily changed by what you're doing (assuming a minimum of insanity hiding in the missing details).

Where to put the delete is up to you. I don't know what you're doing with the data, so I can't say.

Yeah, it doesnt need to be a member, its just It goes out of scope when a function finishes so I cant access it later, thats why I made it a member. I would rather do this without new/delete but I cant figure out how?

You'd have to explain exactly what your program is trying to do and possibly post the whole thing, otherwise I can't tell if it's possible to do it without new/delete or not.

The reason I'm not using vectors is because this is on an 8 bit embedded platform. Its basically C, however using C++ I can use classes which I prefer. If I wanted to use vectors I would need the STL, however I could wrap an array in a struct couldn't I, then pass around the struct.

this is on an 8 bit embedded platform

I would rather do this without new/delete but I cant figure out how?

O_o

Yeah, that would probably be a good idea.

What is `Chord'?

I could wrap an array in a struct couldn't I, then pass around the struct.

Is that not what `Chord' is behind the scenes?

*shrug*

I'm going to assume `Chord' is or could be made such a thing.

In any event, you can just change the way you process the target chord relative to what oogabooga offers.

This is a little C for my tastes, but you should get an idea.

Code:

// You don't need a class aware of all possible mutations.
// You only need a clean interface to allow mutations.
// With that in mind, the `NextInversion' is just a function.
Chord & NextInversion
(
    Chord & fDestination
  , const Chord & fSource
  , uint8_t fDistance = 1
)
{
    // ...
    // Calculate the next `fDistance' inversions of `fSource' and copy the result into `fDestination'.
    // ...
    return(fDestination);
}
// ...

Soma