List implementation in C












5












$begingroup$


I tried to implement a Python-esque list in C. Having not really used C in anger, I'd like some pointers on style and error handling in particular.



Header



#ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
#define __TYPE_LIST_H__

/* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
(has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
functions)
*/

typedef struct list_s list_t;

#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdint.h>

extern const uint16_t default_capacity;

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element));

void list_delete(list_t* list);

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element);
void* list_pop(list_t* list);
bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element);
int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_empty(list_t* list);

#endif


Source



#include <type/list.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

const uint16_t default_capacity = 256;

struct list_s
{
uint16_t length;
uint16_t capacity;
void** elements;
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
void (*element_delete)(void* element);
};

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element))
{
list_t* list = (list_t*) malloc(sizeof(list_t));
if (!list) return NULL;

if (!initial_capacity) {
initial_capacity = default_capacity;
}

list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
if (!list->elements) return NULL;

list->length = 0;
list->capacity = initial_capacity;
list->element_match = element_match;
list->element_delete = element_delete;

return list;
}

void list_delete(list_t* list)
{
if (!list) return;

if (list->element_delete) {
unsigned i;
for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
}
}
else {
fprintf(stderr, "WARNING: no element_delete specified");
}
free(list);
}

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !element)
return false;
if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
// expand the elements array
list->capacity *= 2;
list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
if (!list->elements) {
return false;
}
}
list->length += 1;
list->elements[list->length] = element;
return true;
}

void* list_pop(list_t* list)
{
if (!list || list_empty(list)) {
return NULL;
}
void* element = list->elements[list->length];
list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
list->length -= 1;
return element;
}

bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !list->element_match) {
return false;
}
unsigned i;
bool found = false;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (!found && list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
found = true;
list->length -= 1;
}
if (found) {
// shift all subsequent elements back one
list->elements[i] = list->elements[i + 1];
}
}
return found;
}

int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element)
{
int16_t i;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}

bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element) {
return (list_index(list, element) != -1);
}

bool list_empty(list_t* list)
{
return (list->length == 0);
}









share|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I wanted to suggest you add a main so that the code is self-contained and can be compiled and tested without further effort. It would also show a usage example. But you already have collected 7 (!!!) answers, so you probably don’t care to do so. :/
    $endgroup$
    – Cris Luengo
    Jan 12 at 3:26
















5












$begingroup$


I tried to implement a Python-esque list in C. Having not really used C in anger, I'd like some pointers on style and error handling in particular.



Header



#ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
#define __TYPE_LIST_H__

/* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
(has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
functions)
*/

typedef struct list_s list_t;

#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdint.h>

extern const uint16_t default_capacity;

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element));

void list_delete(list_t* list);

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element);
void* list_pop(list_t* list);
bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element);
int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_empty(list_t* list);

#endif


Source



#include <type/list.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

const uint16_t default_capacity = 256;

struct list_s
{
uint16_t length;
uint16_t capacity;
void** elements;
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
void (*element_delete)(void* element);
};

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element))
{
list_t* list = (list_t*) malloc(sizeof(list_t));
if (!list) return NULL;

if (!initial_capacity) {
initial_capacity = default_capacity;
}

list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
if (!list->elements) return NULL;

list->length = 0;
list->capacity = initial_capacity;
list->element_match = element_match;
list->element_delete = element_delete;

return list;
}

void list_delete(list_t* list)
{
if (!list) return;

if (list->element_delete) {
unsigned i;
for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
}
}
else {
fprintf(stderr, "WARNING: no element_delete specified");
}
free(list);
}

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !element)
return false;
if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
// expand the elements array
list->capacity *= 2;
list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
if (!list->elements) {
return false;
}
}
list->length += 1;
list->elements[list->length] = element;
return true;
}

void* list_pop(list_t* list)
{
if (!list || list_empty(list)) {
return NULL;
}
void* element = list->elements[list->length];
list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
list->length -= 1;
return element;
}

bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !list->element_match) {
return false;
}
unsigned i;
bool found = false;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (!found && list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
found = true;
list->length -= 1;
}
if (found) {
// shift all subsequent elements back one
list->elements[i] = list->elements[i + 1];
}
}
return found;
}

int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element)
{
int16_t i;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}

bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element) {
return (list_index(list, element) != -1);
}

bool list_empty(list_t* list)
{
return (list->length == 0);
}









share|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I wanted to suggest you add a main so that the code is self-contained and can be compiled and tested without further effort. It would also show a usage example. But you already have collected 7 (!!!) answers, so you probably don’t care to do so. :/
    $endgroup$
    – Cris Luengo
    Jan 12 at 3:26














5












5








5





$begingroup$


I tried to implement a Python-esque list in C. Having not really used C in anger, I'd like some pointers on style and error handling in particular.



Header



#ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
#define __TYPE_LIST_H__

/* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
(has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
functions)
*/

typedef struct list_s list_t;

#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdint.h>

extern const uint16_t default_capacity;

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element));

void list_delete(list_t* list);

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element);
void* list_pop(list_t* list);
bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element);
int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_empty(list_t* list);

#endif


Source



#include <type/list.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

const uint16_t default_capacity = 256;

struct list_s
{
uint16_t length;
uint16_t capacity;
void** elements;
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
void (*element_delete)(void* element);
};

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element))
{
list_t* list = (list_t*) malloc(sizeof(list_t));
if (!list) return NULL;

if (!initial_capacity) {
initial_capacity = default_capacity;
}

list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
if (!list->elements) return NULL;

list->length = 0;
list->capacity = initial_capacity;
list->element_match = element_match;
list->element_delete = element_delete;

return list;
}

void list_delete(list_t* list)
{
if (!list) return;

if (list->element_delete) {
unsigned i;
for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
}
}
else {
fprintf(stderr, "WARNING: no element_delete specified");
}
free(list);
}

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !element)
return false;
if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
// expand the elements array
list->capacity *= 2;
list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
if (!list->elements) {
return false;
}
}
list->length += 1;
list->elements[list->length] = element;
return true;
}

void* list_pop(list_t* list)
{
if (!list || list_empty(list)) {
return NULL;
}
void* element = list->elements[list->length];
list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
list->length -= 1;
return element;
}

bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !list->element_match) {
return false;
}
unsigned i;
bool found = false;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (!found && list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
found = true;
list->length -= 1;
}
if (found) {
// shift all subsequent elements back one
list->elements[i] = list->elements[i + 1];
}
}
return found;
}

int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element)
{
int16_t i;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}

bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element) {
return (list_index(list, element) != -1);
}

bool list_empty(list_t* list)
{
return (list->length == 0);
}









share|improve this question











$endgroup$




I tried to implement a Python-esque list in C. Having not really used C in anger, I'd like some pointers on style and error handling in particular.



Header



#ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
#define __TYPE_LIST_H__

/* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
(has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
functions)
*/

typedef struct list_s list_t;

#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdint.h>

extern const uint16_t default_capacity;

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element));

void list_delete(list_t* list);

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element);
void* list_pop(list_t* list);
bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element);
int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element);
bool list_empty(list_t* list);

#endif


Source



#include <type/list.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

const uint16_t default_capacity = 256;

struct list_s
{
uint16_t length;
uint16_t capacity;
void** elements;
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
void (*element_delete)(void* element);
};

list_t* list_create(
uint16_t initial_capacity,
bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
void (*element_delete)(void* element))
{
list_t* list = (list_t*) malloc(sizeof(list_t));
if (!list) return NULL;

if (!initial_capacity) {
initial_capacity = default_capacity;
}

list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
if (!list->elements) return NULL;

list->length = 0;
list->capacity = initial_capacity;
list->element_match = element_match;
list->element_delete = element_delete;

return list;
}

void list_delete(list_t* list)
{
if (!list) return;

if (list->element_delete) {
unsigned i;
for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
}
}
else {
fprintf(stderr, "WARNING: no element_delete specified");
}
free(list);
}

bool list_append(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !element)
return false;
if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
// expand the elements array
list->capacity *= 2;
list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
if (!list->elements) {
return false;
}
}
list->length += 1;
list->elements[list->length] = element;
return true;
}

void* list_pop(list_t* list)
{
if (!list || list_empty(list)) {
return NULL;
}
void* element = list->elements[list->length];
list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
list->length -= 1;
return element;
}

bool list_remove(list_t* list, void* element)
{
if (!list || !list->element_match) {
return false;
}
unsigned i;
bool found = false;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (!found && list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
found = true;
list->length -= 1;
}
if (found) {
// shift all subsequent elements back one
list->elements[i] = list->elements[i + 1];
}
}
return found;
}

int16_t list_index(list_t* list, void* element)
{
int16_t i;
for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
return i;
}
}
return -1;
}

bool list_contains(list_t* list, void* element) {
return (list_index(list, element) != -1);
}

bool list_empty(list_t* list)
{
return (list->length == 0);
}






beginner c reinventing-the-wheel






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jan 4 at 15:49









Reinderien

4,140822




4,140822










asked Jan 4 at 10:24









AidenhjjAidenhjj

1,3882517




1,3882517












  • $begingroup$
    I wanted to suggest you add a main so that the code is self-contained and can be compiled and tested without further effort. It would also show a usage example. But you already have collected 7 (!!!) answers, so you probably don’t care to do so. :/
    $endgroup$
    – Cris Luengo
    Jan 12 at 3:26


















  • $begingroup$
    I wanted to suggest you add a main so that the code is self-contained and can be compiled and tested without further effort. It would also show a usage example. But you already have collected 7 (!!!) answers, so you probably don’t care to do so. :/
    $endgroup$
    – Cris Luengo
    Jan 12 at 3:26
















$begingroup$
I wanted to suggest you add a main so that the code is self-contained and can be compiled and tested without further effort. It would also show a usage example. But you already have collected 7 (!!!) answers, so you probably don’t care to do so. :/
$endgroup$
– Cris Luengo
Jan 12 at 3:26




$begingroup$
I wanted to suggest you add a main so that the code is self-contained and can be compiled and tested without further effort. It would also show a usage example. But you already have collected 7 (!!!) answers, so you probably don’t care to do so. :/
$endgroup$
– Cris Luengo
Jan 12 at 3:26










8 Answers
8






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$


  • Do not cast what malloc returns.



  • It is beneficial to take size of a variable, rather than a type.



        list_t* list = malloc(sizeof *list);


    is immune to possible changes in type of list.



    Along the same line, calloc is preferable when allocating arrays. First, the allocated memory is in known state, and second, multiplication size * number may overflow. Consider



        list->elements = calloc(initial_capacity, sizeof list->elements[0]);


  • list_delete doesn't free(list->elements).



  • list->elements[0] is never initialized. This would cause problems with list_delete. Similarly, list_delete does not touch the last element. Along the same line, list->elements[list->length] gives an impression of out of bounds access.



    An idiomatic way would be to assign the pointer first, and only then increment the length, e.g.



        list->elements[list->length++] = element;



  • list_remove is unnecessarily complicated. Consider breaking it up, e.g.



        i = list_index(list, element)

    if (i == -1) {
    return false;
    }

    while (i < list_length - 1) {
    list->elements[i] = list->elements[i+1];
    }


    I also recommend to factor the last loop out into a list_shift method.








share|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 2




    $begingroup$
    That should be malloc(sizeof list). You probably need more space than a single pointer...
    $endgroup$
    – Cris Luengo
    Jan 12 at 3:29



















5












$begingroup$

Surprising name



default_capacity is in the public .h file



In a header for list_this and list_that, finding default_capacity is not good and a name-space collision headache. Suggest list_default_capacity instead.



0 allocation



Be careful about allocating 0 memory (possible with default_capacity == 0 and list_create(0, ...)). Receiving NULL in that case does not certainly indicate an out-of-memory condition.



// list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
// if (!list->elements) return NULL;

list->elements = malloc(sizeof list->elements[0] * initial_capacity);
if (list->elements == NULL && initial_capacity == 0) {
return NULL;
}


default_capacity not needed



With generic list code, I'd expect the ability to create a 0 length list and not have 0 indicate "use a default value".






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    4












    $begingroup$

    You error on missing function pointers when you try and use them. You should error out when you create the list.



    Don't printf in library functions, even to stderr.



    uint16_t only allows 65k elements, this is really tiny for a list.



    You don't allow NULL elements. Sometimes you want NULL elements in your list, it's a big reason why one would use a list of pointers instead of a list by value.



    There is no way to index into the list or iterate over it.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Thanks for the tips. Re: "Don't printf in library functions" - can you expand on why? Should I be returning error codes or something?
      $endgroup$
      – Aidenhjj
      Jan 4 at 16:34










    • $begingroup$
      C error reporting is really up to you, but here I would specify that element_delete be in list_create, and if it's null, you should return null and set errno.
      $endgroup$
      – Neil Edelman
      Jan 11 at 0:06





















    4












    $begingroup$

    Consider using restrict



    ...on your pointer arguments. If you aren't familiar with this keyword, it requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer, so you'll have to do some reading, but - in short, it can help with performance.



    Use a define instead of a variable



    This:



    extern const uint16_t default_capacity;


    isn't terrible, but it hinders the compiler's capability to optimize based on known constants. Advanced compilers with "whole program optimization" that have an optimization stage between object compilation and link can figure this out, but older or naively configured compilers won't. Using a #define in your header will fix this.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      "[restrict] requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer", no it really doesn't, restrict isn't voodo magic, it is a way for the programmer to tell the compiler "these pointers are un related, and point to different objects". What I said might have even been shorter than your own explanation that you couldn't explain it. Not to mention it can also hurt performance on certain platforms. For example, in CUDA, using restrict can cause register pressure and lower occupancy on SMs (though not always).
      $endgroup$
      – opa
      Jan 4 at 16:45










    • $begingroup$
      @opa I didn't say it was voodoo; I said it can (and not will) improve performance; and I recommended that the OP consider adding this, rather than unconditionally recommending that it be added. You say that the topic is trivially explained, but then contradict this by saying that the behaviour is complex and platform-dependent. So I maintain my recommendation that the OP do further reading.
      $endgroup$
      – Reinderien
      Jan 4 at 16:51










    • $begingroup$
      I literally explained it, the explanation was trivial, the consequences of using it are not trivial, but then again, literally nothing low level is going to be trivial with respect to determining performance for all platforms, even using inlined constants and instructions can cause instruction cache misses critically lowering performance, but the actual explanation of such ideas is fairly simple. In the time you've spent providing excuses and avoiding explaining something important that could help OP, you could have written up a short explanation of restrict.
      $endgroup$
      – opa
      Jan 4 at 16:57






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @opa but the subtleties around letting the compiler assume it are not that trivial.
      $endgroup$
      – ratchet freak
      Jan 4 at 17:18










    • $begingroup$
      I prefer the extern constant as it reduce compilation dependencies and avoiding macros is a good thing too.
      $endgroup$
      – Phil1970
      Jan 11 at 2:08



















    3












    $begingroup$

    What I see:



    Like this answer states you should not be printing as an recoverable error. If your program needs to crash, then you can print, but printing when execution of the program should continue will unexpectedly fill the output stream with stderr symbols that the end user has no easy control of stopping. Instead, use return codes and possibly provide your own error function that returns the proper string of characters that need to be printed based upon the error code. That way they can choose to check the error code, do nothing, fix the problem, or crash on their own volition.



    I'm not sure why you chose uint16_t as your list size type, but incase there are actually situations in which you want to do this, I would suggest instead using



    typedef uint16_t list_size_t;


    so you could potentially do something like:



    #if defined MY_UINT64_DEFINED_VAR
    typedef uint64_t list_size_t;
    #elif defined MY_UINT32_DEFINED_VAR
    typedef uint32_t list_size_t;
    #elif defined MY_UINT16_DEFINED_VAR
    typedef uint16_t list_size_t;
    #endif


    provided you can find a compiler variable or find the size of int or some other compile time definition to figure out the size type you want your system to use.



    You also need to be able to iterate through list elements. I suggest using a function like:



    void* list_get(list_size_t index)


    which would then return the pointer to the element at the given index.



    Another thing you might want to consider is namespace conflicts with:



    typedef struct list_s list_t 


    Because of the lack of namespaces in C, such names can conflict with other names within the same scope and lead to a whole bunch of odd errors that may or may not be hard to track down. list_t is such a generic name, I'm not sure it is appropriate to use directly here, you may want to not pollute the namespace with list_t, and instead keep it as struct list_s. However there is another solution to this problem that also solves other potential namespace conflicts.



    You may want to prefix all of your names with a sort of psuedo namespace specifier (which a lot of other C APIs do, like opengl, vulkan opencv's now defunct C api etc...)



    I would recommend even doing this on macros as well, as they have the same problem (and this practice is also standard).



    for example, lets say you decide to use "abc" as your pseudo namespace name. You would then change:



    bool    list_append(list_t* list, void* element);


    to:



    bool    abc_list_append(abc_list_t* list, void* element);


    yes, this is annoying, but if someone wants to use your library but wants multiple list types, or have multiple libraries called list but don't do the same thing, then they are out of luck. If you use a "pseudo namespace" then they can avoid many of these conflicts. If however, this is only supposed to be used internally in another project or is never going to be released to be used as its own library, you do not have to worry about name-spacing these components to other people, though you may still find conflicts on your own.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      3












      $begingroup$

      In addition to list_get, as opa mentioned, and list_size / list_length to go with it, I would include a version of list_remove that takes an index instead of an element to compare to, for the fairly common scenario where you want to see if an element is in the list, possibly do something with it, and then delete it.



      int player_index = list_index(entity_list, "player");
      if(player_index == -1)
      {
      handle_no_player();
      }
      else
      {
      handle_player();
      list_remove_at(entity_list, player_index);
      }


      Also, since you're using a function pointer for equality comparison anyway, it would be easy to include a version that takes a predicate:



      bool is_on_fire(void *entity) { return ((game_entity*)entity)->on_fire; }
      int first_on_fire = list_index(entity_list, &is_on_fire);


      As the name first_on_fire indicates, the third issue is that if this is representing a general list rather than a set (meaning there can be duplicate elements), then you need a version of list_index that takes a starting index to search from, so that it's possible to find the second / third / nth instance of a given element.



      list_pop is an ambiguous name, since it's not apparent whether it works like a stack or a queue. list_pop_back would be more clear.



      A function that inserts into the middle of a list could be useful as well.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$





















        3












        $begingroup$

        Probably pedantic, but your code could be more robust to errors without significant changes. In your constructor, you could fail-fast the element_delete and not worry about it in your destructor. Instead of going though serially and initialising one by one in create_list, consider setting values to the default first before calling malloc; then you're always in a valid state.



        /* The newly created list or a null pointer and errno is set, (probably, it
        depends what standard you're using for it to be guaranteed.) */
        list_t* list_create(
        const uint16_t initial_capacity,
        const bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
        const void (*element_delete)(void* element))
        {
        list_t* list;

        /* Pre-conditions. */
        if(!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
        errno = EDOM;
        return NULL;
        }

        list = malloc(sizeof *list);
        if (!list) return NULL; /* The malloc will (probably) set the errno. */
        list->length = 0;
        list->capacity = initial_capacity;
        list->elements = NULL;
        list->element_match = element_match;
        list->element_delete = element_delete;

        /* This could fail, so it's after initialisation. */
        list->elements = malloc(sizeof *list->elements * initial_capacity);
        if (!list->elements) {
        list_delete(list);
        return NULL;
        }

        return list;
        }

        /* If the list has been initialised, this will work regardless. */
        void list_delete(const list_t* list)
        {
        unsigned i;
        if (!list) return;
        for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
        list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
        }
        free(list->elements);
        free(list);
        }


        (I haven't tested this. You will need to #include <errno.h>.)






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$





















          0












          $begingroup$

          For anyone curious, here's my code with the comments taken on board:



          Header



          #ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
          #define __TYPE_LIST_H__

          /* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
          (has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
          functions)
          */

          typedef struct sdlui_list_s sdlui_list_t;

          #include <stdbool.h>
          #include <stdint.h>

          sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
          uint32_t initial_capacity,
          bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
          void (*element_delete)(void* element));

          void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list);

          bool sdlui_list_append (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
          bool sdlui_list_pop_back (sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret);
          bool sdlui_list_get (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret);
          bool sdlui_list_remove (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
          bool sdlui_list_remove_at (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index);
          void sdlui_list_shift (sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index);
          int64_t sdlui_list_index (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
          int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
          int64_t start_index);
          bool sdlui_list_contains (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
          bool sdlui_list_empty (sdlui_list_t* list);
          uint32_t sdlui_list_length (sdlui_list_t* list);

          #endif


          Source



          #include <errno.h>
          #include <stdio.h>
          #include <stdlib.h>

          #include <type/list.h>

          struct sdlui_list_s
          {
          uint32_t length;
          uint32_t capacity;
          void** elements;
          bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
          void (*element_delete)(void* element);
          };

          sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
          uint32_t initial_capacity,
          bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
          void (*element_delete)(void* element))
          {
          sdlui_list_t* list;

          if (!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
          errno = EDOM;
          return NULL;
          }
          list = (sdlui_list_t*) malloc(sizeof(sdlui_list_t));
          if (!list) return NULL;

          list->length = 0;
          list->capacity = initial_capacity;
          list->element_match = element_match;
          list->element_delete = element_delete;

          list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(list->elements[0]) * initial_capacity);
          if (!list->elements) {
          sdlui_list_delete(list);
          return NULL;
          }
          return list;
          }

          void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list)
          {
          unsigned i;
          for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
          list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
          }
          free(list->elements);
          free(list);
          }

          bool sdlui_list_append(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
          {
          if (!list)
          return false;
          if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
          // expand the elements array
          list->capacity *= 2;
          list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
          if (!list->elements) {
          return false;
          }
          }
          list->elements[list->length++] = element;
          return true;
          }

          bool sdlui_list_get(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret) {
          if (!list || index > list->length) {
          return false;
          }
          ret = list->elements[index];
          return true;
          }

          bool sdlui_list_pop_back(sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret)
          {
          if (!list || sdlui_list_empty(list)) {
          return false;
          }
          ret = list->elements[list->length];
          list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
          list->length--;
          return true;
          }

          bool sdlui_list_remove(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
          {
          int64_t i = sdlui_list_index(list, element);

          if (i == -1) {
          return false;
          }

          sdlui_list_shift(list, i);
          list->length--;
          return true;
          }

          bool sdlui_list_remove_at(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index)
          {
          if (list->length == 0) {
          return false;
          }
          sdlui_list_shift(list, index);
          list->length--;
          return true;
          }

          void sdlui_list_shift(sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index)
          {
          while ((uint32_t)start_index < list->length - 1) {
          list->elements[start_index] = list->elements[start_index+1];
          start_index++;
          }
          }

          int64_t sdlui_list_index(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
          {
          return sdlui_list_index_from(list, element, 0);
          }

          int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
          int64_t start_index)
          {
          if (!list->element_match || list->length < (uint32_t) start_index) {
          /* No way to compare */
          return -1;
          }
          uint32_t i;
          for (i = start_index; i < list->length; i++) {
          if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
          return i;
          }
          }
          return -1;
          }


          bool sdlui_list_contains(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element) {
          return (sdlui_list_index(list, element) != -1);
          }

          bool sdlui_list_empty(sdlui_list_t* list)
          {
          if (!list) {
          return false;
          }
          else {
          return (list->length == 0);
          }
          }

          uint32_t sdlui_list_length(sdlui_list_t* list) {
          return list->length;
          }





          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
            StackExchange.snippets.init();
            });
            });
            }, "code-snippets");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "196"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f210861%2flist-implementation-in-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            8 Answers
            8






            active

            oldest

            votes








            8 Answers
            8






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            4












            $begingroup$


            • Do not cast what malloc returns.



            • It is beneficial to take size of a variable, rather than a type.



                  list_t* list = malloc(sizeof *list);


              is immune to possible changes in type of list.



              Along the same line, calloc is preferable when allocating arrays. First, the allocated memory is in known state, and second, multiplication size * number may overflow. Consider



                  list->elements = calloc(initial_capacity, sizeof list->elements[0]);


            • list_delete doesn't free(list->elements).



            • list->elements[0] is never initialized. This would cause problems with list_delete. Similarly, list_delete does not touch the last element. Along the same line, list->elements[list->length] gives an impression of out of bounds access.



              An idiomatic way would be to assign the pointer first, and only then increment the length, e.g.



                  list->elements[list->length++] = element;



            • list_remove is unnecessarily complicated. Consider breaking it up, e.g.



                  i = list_index(list, element)

              if (i == -1) {
              return false;
              }

              while (i < list_length - 1) {
              list->elements[i] = list->elements[i+1];
              }


              I also recommend to factor the last loop out into a list_shift method.








            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$









            • 2




              $begingroup$
              That should be malloc(sizeof list). You probably need more space than a single pointer...
              $endgroup$
              – Cris Luengo
              Jan 12 at 3:29
















            4












            $begingroup$


            • Do not cast what malloc returns.



            • It is beneficial to take size of a variable, rather than a type.



                  list_t* list = malloc(sizeof *list);


              is immune to possible changes in type of list.



              Along the same line, calloc is preferable when allocating arrays. First, the allocated memory is in known state, and second, multiplication size * number may overflow. Consider



                  list->elements = calloc(initial_capacity, sizeof list->elements[0]);


            • list_delete doesn't free(list->elements).



            • list->elements[0] is never initialized. This would cause problems with list_delete. Similarly, list_delete does not touch the last element. Along the same line, list->elements[list->length] gives an impression of out of bounds access.



              An idiomatic way would be to assign the pointer first, and only then increment the length, e.g.



                  list->elements[list->length++] = element;



            • list_remove is unnecessarily complicated. Consider breaking it up, e.g.



                  i = list_index(list, element)

              if (i == -1) {
              return false;
              }

              while (i < list_length - 1) {
              list->elements[i] = list->elements[i+1];
              }


              I also recommend to factor the last loop out into a list_shift method.








            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$









            • 2




              $begingroup$
              That should be malloc(sizeof list). You probably need more space than a single pointer...
              $endgroup$
              – Cris Luengo
              Jan 12 at 3:29














            4












            4








            4





            $begingroup$


            • Do not cast what malloc returns.



            • It is beneficial to take size of a variable, rather than a type.



                  list_t* list = malloc(sizeof *list);


              is immune to possible changes in type of list.



              Along the same line, calloc is preferable when allocating arrays. First, the allocated memory is in known state, and second, multiplication size * number may overflow. Consider



                  list->elements = calloc(initial_capacity, sizeof list->elements[0]);


            • list_delete doesn't free(list->elements).



            • list->elements[0] is never initialized. This would cause problems with list_delete. Similarly, list_delete does not touch the last element. Along the same line, list->elements[list->length] gives an impression of out of bounds access.



              An idiomatic way would be to assign the pointer first, and only then increment the length, e.g.



                  list->elements[list->length++] = element;



            • list_remove is unnecessarily complicated. Consider breaking it up, e.g.



                  i = list_index(list, element)

              if (i == -1) {
              return false;
              }

              while (i < list_length - 1) {
              list->elements[i] = list->elements[i+1];
              }


              I also recommend to factor the last loop out into a list_shift method.








            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$




            • Do not cast what malloc returns.



            • It is beneficial to take size of a variable, rather than a type.



                  list_t* list = malloc(sizeof *list);


              is immune to possible changes in type of list.



              Along the same line, calloc is preferable when allocating arrays. First, the allocated memory is in known state, and second, multiplication size * number may overflow. Consider



                  list->elements = calloc(initial_capacity, sizeof list->elements[0]);


            • list_delete doesn't free(list->elements).



            • list->elements[0] is never initialized. This would cause problems with list_delete. Similarly, list_delete does not touch the last element. Along the same line, list->elements[list->length] gives an impression of out of bounds access.



              An idiomatic way would be to assign the pointer first, and only then increment the length, e.g.



                  list->elements[list->length++] = element;



            • list_remove is unnecessarily complicated. Consider breaking it up, e.g.



                  i = list_index(list, element)

              if (i == -1) {
              return false;
              }

              while (i < list_length - 1) {
              list->elements[i] = list->elements[i+1];
              }


              I also recommend to factor the last loop out into a list_shift method.









            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Jan 4 at 21:11









            vnpvnp

            39.3k13099




            39.3k13099








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              That should be malloc(sizeof list). You probably need more space than a single pointer...
              $endgroup$
              – Cris Luengo
              Jan 12 at 3:29














            • 2




              $begingroup$
              That should be malloc(sizeof list). You probably need more space than a single pointer...
              $endgroup$
              – Cris Luengo
              Jan 12 at 3:29








            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            That should be malloc(sizeof list). You probably need more space than a single pointer...
            $endgroup$
            – Cris Luengo
            Jan 12 at 3:29




            $begingroup$
            That should be malloc(sizeof list). You probably need more space than a single pointer...
            $endgroup$
            – Cris Luengo
            Jan 12 at 3:29













            5












            $begingroup$

            Surprising name



            default_capacity is in the public .h file



            In a header for list_this and list_that, finding default_capacity is not good and a name-space collision headache. Suggest list_default_capacity instead.



            0 allocation



            Be careful about allocating 0 memory (possible with default_capacity == 0 and list_create(0, ...)). Receiving NULL in that case does not certainly indicate an out-of-memory condition.



            // list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
            // if (!list->elements) return NULL;

            list->elements = malloc(sizeof list->elements[0] * initial_capacity);
            if (list->elements == NULL && initial_capacity == 0) {
            return NULL;
            }


            default_capacity not needed



            With generic list code, I'd expect the ability to create a 0 length list and not have 0 indicate "use a default value".






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$


















              5












              $begingroup$

              Surprising name



              default_capacity is in the public .h file



              In a header for list_this and list_that, finding default_capacity is not good and a name-space collision headache. Suggest list_default_capacity instead.



              0 allocation



              Be careful about allocating 0 memory (possible with default_capacity == 0 and list_create(0, ...)). Receiving NULL in that case does not certainly indicate an out-of-memory condition.



              // list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
              // if (!list->elements) return NULL;

              list->elements = malloc(sizeof list->elements[0] * initial_capacity);
              if (list->elements == NULL && initial_capacity == 0) {
              return NULL;
              }


              default_capacity not needed



              With generic list code, I'd expect the ability to create a 0 length list and not have 0 indicate "use a default value".






              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$
















                5












                5








                5





                $begingroup$

                Surprising name



                default_capacity is in the public .h file



                In a header for list_this and list_that, finding default_capacity is not good and a name-space collision headache. Suggest list_default_capacity instead.



                0 allocation



                Be careful about allocating 0 memory (possible with default_capacity == 0 and list_create(0, ...)). Receiving NULL in that case does not certainly indicate an out-of-memory condition.



                // list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
                // if (!list->elements) return NULL;

                list->elements = malloc(sizeof list->elements[0] * initial_capacity);
                if (list->elements == NULL && initial_capacity == 0) {
                return NULL;
                }


                default_capacity not needed



                With generic list code, I'd expect the ability to create a 0 length list and not have 0 indicate "use a default value".






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                Surprising name



                default_capacity is in the public .h file



                In a header for list_this and list_that, finding default_capacity is not good and a name-space collision headache. Suggest list_default_capacity instead.



                0 allocation



                Be careful about allocating 0 memory (possible with default_capacity == 0 and list_create(0, ...)). Receiving NULL in that case does not certainly indicate an out-of-memory condition.



                // list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(void*) * initial_capacity);
                // if (!list->elements) return NULL;

                list->elements = malloc(sizeof list->elements[0] * initial_capacity);
                if (list->elements == NULL && initial_capacity == 0) {
                return NULL;
                }


                default_capacity not needed



                With generic list code, I'd expect the ability to create a 0 length list and not have 0 indicate "use a default value".







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited Jan 7 at 15:03

























                answered Jan 7 at 0:28









                chuxchux

                13.2k21344




                13.2k21344























                    4












                    $begingroup$

                    You error on missing function pointers when you try and use them. You should error out when you create the list.



                    Don't printf in library functions, even to stderr.



                    uint16_t only allows 65k elements, this is really tiny for a list.



                    You don't allow NULL elements. Sometimes you want NULL elements in your list, it's a big reason why one would use a list of pointers instead of a list by value.



                    There is no way to index into the list or iterate over it.






                    share|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      Thanks for the tips. Re: "Don't printf in library functions" - can you expand on why? Should I be returning error codes or something?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Aidenhjj
                      Jan 4 at 16:34










                    • $begingroup$
                      C error reporting is really up to you, but here I would specify that element_delete be in list_create, and if it's null, you should return null and set errno.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Neil Edelman
                      Jan 11 at 0:06


















                    4












                    $begingroup$

                    You error on missing function pointers when you try and use them. You should error out when you create the list.



                    Don't printf in library functions, even to stderr.



                    uint16_t only allows 65k elements, this is really tiny for a list.



                    You don't allow NULL elements. Sometimes you want NULL elements in your list, it's a big reason why one would use a list of pointers instead of a list by value.



                    There is no way to index into the list or iterate over it.






                    share|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      Thanks for the tips. Re: "Don't printf in library functions" - can you expand on why? Should I be returning error codes or something?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Aidenhjj
                      Jan 4 at 16:34










                    • $begingroup$
                      C error reporting is really up to you, but here I would specify that element_delete be in list_create, and if it's null, you should return null and set errno.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Neil Edelman
                      Jan 11 at 0:06
















                    4












                    4








                    4





                    $begingroup$

                    You error on missing function pointers when you try and use them. You should error out when you create the list.



                    Don't printf in library functions, even to stderr.



                    uint16_t only allows 65k elements, this is really tiny for a list.



                    You don't allow NULL elements. Sometimes you want NULL elements in your list, it's a big reason why one would use a list of pointers instead of a list by value.



                    There is no way to index into the list or iterate over it.






                    share|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    You error on missing function pointers when you try and use them. You should error out when you create the list.



                    Don't printf in library functions, even to stderr.



                    uint16_t only allows 65k elements, this is really tiny for a list.



                    You don't allow NULL elements. Sometimes you want NULL elements in your list, it's a big reason why one would use a list of pointers instead of a list by value.



                    There is no way to index into the list or iterate over it.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered Jan 4 at 13:41









                    ratchet freakratchet freak

                    11.9k1343




                    11.9k1343












                    • $begingroup$
                      Thanks for the tips. Re: "Don't printf in library functions" - can you expand on why? Should I be returning error codes or something?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Aidenhjj
                      Jan 4 at 16:34










                    • $begingroup$
                      C error reporting is really up to you, but here I would specify that element_delete be in list_create, and if it's null, you should return null and set errno.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Neil Edelman
                      Jan 11 at 0:06




















                    • $begingroup$
                      Thanks for the tips. Re: "Don't printf in library functions" - can you expand on why? Should I be returning error codes or something?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Aidenhjj
                      Jan 4 at 16:34










                    • $begingroup$
                      C error reporting is really up to you, but here I would specify that element_delete be in list_create, and if it's null, you should return null and set errno.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Neil Edelman
                      Jan 11 at 0:06


















                    $begingroup$
                    Thanks for the tips. Re: "Don't printf in library functions" - can you expand on why? Should I be returning error codes or something?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Aidenhjj
                    Jan 4 at 16:34




                    $begingroup$
                    Thanks for the tips. Re: "Don't printf in library functions" - can you expand on why? Should I be returning error codes or something?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Aidenhjj
                    Jan 4 at 16:34












                    $begingroup$
                    C error reporting is really up to you, but here I would specify that element_delete be in list_create, and if it's null, you should return null and set errno.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Neil Edelman
                    Jan 11 at 0:06






                    $begingroup$
                    C error reporting is really up to you, but here I would specify that element_delete be in list_create, and if it's null, you should return null and set errno.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Neil Edelman
                    Jan 11 at 0:06













                    4












                    $begingroup$

                    Consider using restrict



                    ...on your pointer arguments. If you aren't familiar with this keyword, it requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer, so you'll have to do some reading, but - in short, it can help with performance.



                    Use a define instead of a variable



                    This:



                    extern const uint16_t default_capacity;


                    isn't terrible, but it hinders the compiler's capability to optimize based on known constants. Advanced compilers with "whole program optimization" that have an optimization stage between object compilation and link can figure this out, but older or naively configured compilers won't. Using a #define in your header will fix this.






                    share|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      "[restrict] requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer", no it really doesn't, restrict isn't voodo magic, it is a way for the programmer to tell the compiler "these pointers are un related, and point to different objects". What I said might have even been shorter than your own explanation that you couldn't explain it. Not to mention it can also hurt performance on certain platforms. For example, in CUDA, using restrict can cause register pressure and lower occupancy on SMs (though not always).
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:45










                    • $begingroup$
                      @opa I didn't say it was voodoo; I said it can (and not will) improve performance; and I recommended that the OP consider adding this, rather than unconditionally recommending that it be added. You say that the topic is trivially explained, but then contradict this by saying that the behaviour is complex and platform-dependent. So I maintain my recommendation that the OP do further reading.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Reinderien
                      Jan 4 at 16:51










                    • $begingroup$
                      I literally explained it, the explanation was trivial, the consequences of using it are not trivial, but then again, literally nothing low level is going to be trivial with respect to determining performance for all platforms, even using inlined constants and instructions can cause instruction cache misses critically lowering performance, but the actual explanation of such ideas is fairly simple. In the time you've spent providing excuses and avoiding explaining something important that could help OP, you could have written up a short explanation of restrict.
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:57






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @opa but the subtleties around letting the compiler assume it are not that trivial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – ratchet freak
                      Jan 4 at 17:18










                    • $begingroup$
                      I prefer the extern constant as it reduce compilation dependencies and avoiding macros is a good thing too.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Phil1970
                      Jan 11 at 2:08
















                    4












                    $begingroup$

                    Consider using restrict



                    ...on your pointer arguments. If you aren't familiar with this keyword, it requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer, so you'll have to do some reading, but - in short, it can help with performance.



                    Use a define instead of a variable



                    This:



                    extern const uint16_t default_capacity;


                    isn't terrible, but it hinders the compiler's capability to optimize based on known constants. Advanced compilers with "whole program optimization" that have an optimization stage between object compilation and link can figure this out, but older or naively configured compilers won't. Using a #define in your header will fix this.






                    share|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      "[restrict] requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer", no it really doesn't, restrict isn't voodo magic, it is a way for the programmer to tell the compiler "these pointers are un related, and point to different objects". What I said might have even been shorter than your own explanation that you couldn't explain it. Not to mention it can also hurt performance on certain platforms. For example, in CUDA, using restrict can cause register pressure and lower occupancy on SMs (though not always).
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:45










                    • $begingroup$
                      @opa I didn't say it was voodoo; I said it can (and not will) improve performance; and I recommended that the OP consider adding this, rather than unconditionally recommending that it be added. You say that the topic is trivially explained, but then contradict this by saying that the behaviour is complex and platform-dependent. So I maintain my recommendation that the OP do further reading.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Reinderien
                      Jan 4 at 16:51










                    • $begingroup$
                      I literally explained it, the explanation was trivial, the consequences of using it are not trivial, but then again, literally nothing low level is going to be trivial with respect to determining performance for all platforms, even using inlined constants and instructions can cause instruction cache misses critically lowering performance, but the actual explanation of such ideas is fairly simple. In the time you've spent providing excuses and avoiding explaining something important that could help OP, you could have written up a short explanation of restrict.
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:57






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @opa but the subtleties around letting the compiler assume it are not that trivial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – ratchet freak
                      Jan 4 at 17:18










                    • $begingroup$
                      I prefer the extern constant as it reduce compilation dependencies and avoiding macros is a good thing too.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Phil1970
                      Jan 11 at 2:08














                    4












                    4








                    4





                    $begingroup$

                    Consider using restrict



                    ...on your pointer arguments. If you aren't familiar with this keyword, it requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer, so you'll have to do some reading, but - in short, it can help with performance.



                    Use a define instead of a variable



                    This:



                    extern const uint16_t default_capacity;


                    isn't terrible, but it hinders the compiler's capability to optimize based on known constants. Advanced compilers with "whole program optimization" that have an optimization stage between object compilation and link can figure this out, but older or naively configured compilers won't. Using a #define in your header will fix this.






                    share|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    Consider using restrict



                    ...on your pointer arguments. If you aren't familiar with this keyword, it requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer, so you'll have to do some reading, but - in short, it can help with performance.



                    Use a define instead of a variable



                    This:



                    extern const uint16_t default_capacity;


                    isn't terrible, but it hinders the compiler's capability to optimize based on known constants. Advanced compilers with "whole program optimization" that have an optimization stage between object compilation and link can figure this out, but older or naively configured compilers won't. Using a #define in your header will fix this.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered Jan 4 at 16:02









                    ReinderienReinderien

                    4,140822




                    4,140822












                    • $begingroup$
                      "[restrict] requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer", no it really doesn't, restrict isn't voodo magic, it is a way for the programmer to tell the compiler "these pointers are un related, and point to different objects". What I said might have even been shorter than your own explanation that you couldn't explain it. Not to mention it can also hurt performance on certain platforms. For example, in CUDA, using restrict can cause register pressure and lower occupancy on SMs (though not always).
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:45










                    • $begingroup$
                      @opa I didn't say it was voodoo; I said it can (and not will) improve performance; and I recommended that the OP consider adding this, rather than unconditionally recommending that it be added. You say that the topic is trivially explained, but then contradict this by saying that the behaviour is complex and platform-dependent. So I maintain my recommendation that the OP do further reading.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Reinderien
                      Jan 4 at 16:51










                    • $begingroup$
                      I literally explained it, the explanation was trivial, the consequences of using it are not trivial, but then again, literally nothing low level is going to be trivial with respect to determining performance for all platforms, even using inlined constants and instructions can cause instruction cache misses critically lowering performance, but the actual explanation of such ideas is fairly simple. In the time you've spent providing excuses and avoiding explaining something important that could help OP, you could have written up a short explanation of restrict.
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:57






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @opa but the subtleties around letting the compiler assume it are not that trivial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – ratchet freak
                      Jan 4 at 17:18










                    • $begingroup$
                      I prefer the extern constant as it reduce compilation dependencies and avoiding macros is a good thing too.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Phil1970
                      Jan 11 at 2:08


















                    • $begingroup$
                      "[restrict] requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer", no it really doesn't, restrict isn't voodo magic, it is a way for the programmer to tell the compiler "these pointers are un related, and point to different objects". What I said might have even been shorter than your own explanation that you couldn't explain it. Not to mention it can also hurt performance on certain platforms. For example, in CUDA, using restrict can cause register pressure and lower occupancy on SMs (though not always).
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:45










                    • $begingroup$
                      @opa I didn't say it was voodoo; I said it can (and not will) improve performance; and I recommended that the OP consider adding this, rather than unconditionally recommending that it be added. You say that the topic is trivially explained, but then contradict this by saying that the behaviour is complex and platform-dependent. So I maintain my recommendation that the OP do further reading.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Reinderien
                      Jan 4 at 16:51










                    • $begingroup$
                      I literally explained it, the explanation was trivial, the consequences of using it are not trivial, but then again, literally nothing low level is going to be trivial with respect to determining performance for all platforms, even using inlined constants and instructions can cause instruction cache misses critically lowering performance, but the actual explanation of such ideas is fairly simple. In the time you've spent providing excuses and avoiding explaining something important that could help OP, you could have written up a short explanation of restrict.
                      $endgroup$
                      – opa
                      Jan 4 at 16:57






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @opa but the subtleties around letting the compiler assume it are not that trivial.
                      $endgroup$
                      – ratchet freak
                      Jan 4 at 17:18










                    • $begingroup$
                      I prefer the extern constant as it reduce compilation dependencies and avoiding macros is a good thing too.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Phil1970
                      Jan 11 at 2:08
















                    $begingroup$
                    "[restrict] requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer", no it really doesn't, restrict isn't voodo magic, it is a way for the programmer to tell the compiler "these pointers are un related, and point to different objects". What I said might have even been shorter than your own explanation that you couldn't explain it. Not to mention it can also hurt performance on certain platforms. For example, in CUDA, using restrict can cause register pressure and lower occupancy on SMs (though not always).
                    $endgroup$
                    – opa
                    Jan 4 at 16:45




                    $begingroup$
                    "[restrict] requires more explanation than can reasonably go into this answer", no it really doesn't, restrict isn't voodo magic, it is a way for the programmer to tell the compiler "these pointers are un related, and point to different objects". What I said might have even been shorter than your own explanation that you couldn't explain it. Not to mention it can also hurt performance on certain platforms. For example, in CUDA, using restrict can cause register pressure and lower occupancy on SMs (though not always).
                    $endgroup$
                    – opa
                    Jan 4 at 16:45












                    $begingroup$
                    @opa I didn't say it was voodoo; I said it can (and not will) improve performance; and I recommended that the OP consider adding this, rather than unconditionally recommending that it be added. You say that the topic is trivially explained, but then contradict this by saying that the behaviour is complex and platform-dependent. So I maintain my recommendation that the OP do further reading.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Reinderien
                    Jan 4 at 16:51




                    $begingroup$
                    @opa I didn't say it was voodoo; I said it can (and not will) improve performance; and I recommended that the OP consider adding this, rather than unconditionally recommending that it be added. You say that the topic is trivially explained, but then contradict this by saying that the behaviour is complex and platform-dependent. So I maintain my recommendation that the OP do further reading.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Reinderien
                    Jan 4 at 16:51












                    $begingroup$
                    I literally explained it, the explanation was trivial, the consequences of using it are not trivial, but then again, literally nothing low level is going to be trivial with respect to determining performance for all platforms, even using inlined constants and instructions can cause instruction cache misses critically lowering performance, but the actual explanation of such ideas is fairly simple. In the time you've spent providing excuses and avoiding explaining something important that could help OP, you could have written up a short explanation of restrict.
                    $endgroup$
                    – opa
                    Jan 4 at 16:57




                    $begingroup$
                    I literally explained it, the explanation was trivial, the consequences of using it are not trivial, but then again, literally nothing low level is going to be trivial with respect to determining performance for all platforms, even using inlined constants and instructions can cause instruction cache misses critically lowering performance, but the actual explanation of such ideas is fairly simple. In the time you've spent providing excuses and avoiding explaining something important that could help OP, you could have written up a short explanation of restrict.
                    $endgroup$
                    – opa
                    Jan 4 at 16:57




                    1




                    1




                    $begingroup$
                    @opa but the subtleties around letting the compiler assume it are not that trivial.
                    $endgroup$
                    – ratchet freak
                    Jan 4 at 17:18




                    $begingroup$
                    @opa but the subtleties around letting the compiler assume it are not that trivial.
                    $endgroup$
                    – ratchet freak
                    Jan 4 at 17:18












                    $begingroup$
                    I prefer the extern constant as it reduce compilation dependencies and avoiding macros is a good thing too.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Phil1970
                    Jan 11 at 2:08




                    $begingroup$
                    I prefer the extern constant as it reduce compilation dependencies and avoiding macros is a good thing too.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Phil1970
                    Jan 11 at 2:08











                    3












                    $begingroup$

                    What I see:



                    Like this answer states you should not be printing as an recoverable error. If your program needs to crash, then you can print, but printing when execution of the program should continue will unexpectedly fill the output stream with stderr symbols that the end user has no easy control of stopping. Instead, use return codes and possibly provide your own error function that returns the proper string of characters that need to be printed based upon the error code. That way they can choose to check the error code, do nothing, fix the problem, or crash on their own volition.



                    I'm not sure why you chose uint16_t as your list size type, but incase there are actually situations in which you want to do this, I would suggest instead using



                    typedef uint16_t list_size_t;


                    so you could potentially do something like:



                    #if defined MY_UINT64_DEFINED_VAR
                    typedef uint64_t list_size_t;
                    #elif defined MY_UINT32_DEFINED_VAR
                    typedef uint32_t list_size_t;
                    #elif defined MY_UINT16_DEFINED_VAR
                    typedef uint16_t list_size_t;
                    #endif


                    provided you can find a compiler variable or find the size of int or some other compile time definition to figure out the size type you want your system to use.



                    You also need to be able to iterate through list elements. I suggest using a function like:



                    void* list_get(list_size_t index)


                    which would then return the pointer to the element at the given index.



                    Another thing you might want to consider is namespace conflicts with:



                    typedef struct list_s list_t 


                    Because of the lack of namespaces in C, such names can conflict with other names within the same scope and lead to a whole bunch of odd errors that may or may not be hard to track down. list_t is such a generic name, I'm not sure it is appropriate to use directly here, you may want to not pollute the namespace with list_t, and instead keep it as struct list_s. However there is another solution to this problem that also solves other potential namespace conflicts.



                    You may want to prefix all of your names with a sort of psuedo namespace specifier (which a lot of other C APIs do, like opengl, vulkan opencv's now defunct C api etc...)



                    I would recommend even doing this on macros as well, as they have the same problem (and this practice is also standard).



                    for example, lets say you decide to use "abc" as your pseudo namespace name. You would then change:



                    bool    list_append(list_t* list, void* element);


                    to:



                    bool    abc_list_append(abc_list_t* list, void* element);


                    yes, this is annoying, but if someone wants to use your library but wants multiple list types, or have multiple libraries called list but don't do the same thing, then they are out of luck. If you use a "pseudo namespace" then they can avoid many of these conflicts. If however, this is only supposed to be used internally in another project or is never going to be released to be used as its own library, you do not have to worry about name-spacing these components to other people, though you may still find conflicts on your own.






                    share|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$


















                      3












                      $begingroup$

                      What I see:



                      Like this answer states you should not be printing as an recoverable error. If your program needs to crash, then you can print, but printing when execution of the program should continue will unexpectedly fill the output stream with stderr symbols that the end user has no easy control of stopping. Instead, use return codes and possibly provide your own error function that returns the proper string of characters that need to be printed based upon the error code. That way they can choose to check the error code, do nothing, fix the problem, or crash on their own volition.



                      I'm not sure why you chose uint16_t as your list size type, but incase there are actually situations in which you want to do this, I would suggest instead using



                      typedef uint16_t list_size_t;


                      so you could potentially do something like:



                      #if defined MY_UINT64_DEFINED_VAR
                      typedef uint64_t list_size_t;
                      #elif defined MY_UINT32_DEFINED_VAR
                      typedef uint32_t list_size_t;
                      #elif defined MY_UINT16_DEFINED_VAR
                      typedef uint16_t list_size_t;
                      #endif


                      provided you can find a compiler variable or find the size of int or some other compile time definition to figure out the size type you want your system to use.



                      You also need to be able to iterate through list elements. I suggest using a function like:



                      void* list_get(list_size_t index)


                      which would then return the pointer to the element at the given index.



                      Another thing you might want to consider is namespace conflicts with:



                      typedef struct list_s list_t 


                      Because of the lack of namespaces in C, such names can conflict with other names within the same scope and lead to a whole bunch of odd errors that may or may not be hard to track down. list_t is such a generic name, I'm not sure it is appropriate to use directly here, you may want to not pollute the namespace with list_t, and instead keep it as struct list_s. However there is another solution to this problem that also solves other potential namespace conflicts.



                      You may want to prefix all of your names with a sort of psuedo namespace specifier (which a lot of other C APIs do, like opengl, vulkan opencv's now defunct C api etc...)



                      I would recommend even doing this on macros as well, as they have the same problem (and this practice is also standard).



                      for example, lets say you decide to use "abc" as your pseudo namespace name. You would then change:



                      bool    list_append(list_t* list, void* element);


                      to:



                      bool    abc_list_append(abc_list_t* list, void* element);


                      yes, this is annoying, but if someone wants to use your library but wants multiple list types, or have multiple libraries called list but don't do the same thing, then they are out of luck. If you use a "pseudo namespace" then they can avoid many of these conflicts. If however, this is only supposed to be used internally in another project or is never going to be released to be used as its own library, you do not have to worry about name-spacing these components to other people, though you may still find conflicts on your own.






                      share|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$
















                        3












                        3








                        3





                        $begingroup$

                        What I see:



                        Like this answer states you should not be printing as an recoverable error. If your program needs to crash, then you can print, but printing when execution of the program should continue will unexpectedly fill the output stream with stderr symbols that the end user has no easy control of stopping. Instead, use return codes and possibly provide your own error function that returns the proper string of characters that need to be printed based upon the error code. That way they can choose to check the error code, do nothing, fix the problem, or crash on their own volition.



                        I'm not sure why you chose uint16_t as your list size type, but incase there are actually situations in which you want to do this, I would suggest instead using



                        typedef uint16_t list_size_t;


                        so you could potentially do something like:



                        #if defined MY_UINT64_DEFINED_VAR
                        typedef uint64_t list_size_t;
                        #elif defined MY_UINT32_DEFINED_VAR
                        typedef uint32_t list_size_t;
                        #elif defined MY_UINT16_DEFINED_VAR
                        typedef uint16_t list_size_t;
                        #endif


                        provided you can find a compiler variable or find the size of int or some other compile time definition to figure out the size type you want your system to use.



                        You also need to be able to iterate through list elements. I suggest using a function like:



                        void* list_get(list_size_t index)


                        which would then return the pointer to the element at the given index.



                        Another thing you might want to consider is namespace conflicts with:



                        typedef struct list_s list_t 


                        Because of the lack of namespaces in C, such names can conflict with other names within the same scope and lead to a whole bunch of odd errors that may or may not be hard to track down. list_t is such a generic name, I'm not sure it is appropriate to use directly here, you may want to not pollute the namespace with list_t, and instead keep it as struct list_s. However there is another solution to this problem that also solves other potential namespace conflicts.



                        You may want to prefix all of your names with a sort of psuedo namespace specifier (which a lot of other C APIs do, like opengl, vulkan opencv's now defunct C api etc...)



                        I would recommend even doing this on macros as well, as they have the same problem (and this practice is also standard).



                        for example, lets say you decide to use "abc" as your pseudo namespace name. You would then change:



                        bool    list_append(list_t* list, void* element);


                        to:



                        bool    abc_list_append(abc_list_t* list, void* element);


                        yes, this is annoying, but if someone wants to use your library but wants multiple list types, or have multiple libraries called list but don't do the same thing, then they are out of luck. If you use a "pseudo namespace" then they can avoid many of these conflicts. If however, this is only supposed to be used internally in another project or is never going to be released to be used as its own library, you do not have to worry about name-spacing these components to other people, though you may still find conflicts on your own.






                        share|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$



                        What I see:



                        Like this answer states you should not be printing as an recoverable error. If your program needs to crash, then you can print, but printing when execution of the program should continue will unexpectedly fill the output stream with stderr symbols that the end user has no easy control of stopping. Instead, use return codes and possibly provide your own error function that returns the proper string of characters that need to be printed based upon the error code. That way they can choose to check the error code, do nothing, fix the problem, or crash on their own volition.



                        I'm not sure why you chose uint16_t as your list size type, but incase there are actually situations in which you want to do this, I would suggest instead using



                        typedef uint16_t list_size_t;


                        so you could potentially do something like:



                        #if defined MY_UINT64_DEFINED_VAR
                        typedef uint64_t list_size_t;
                        #elif defined MY_UINT32_DEFINED_VAR
                        typedef uint32_t list_size_t;
                        #elif defined MY_UINT16_DEFINED_VAR
                        typedef uint16_t list_size_t;
                        #endif


                        provided you can find a compiler variable or find the size of int or some other compile time definition to figure out the size type you want your system to use.



                        You also need to be able to iterate through list elements. I suggest using a function like:



                        void* list_get(list_size_t index)


                        which would then return the pointer to the element at the given index.



                        Another thing you might want to consider is namespace conflicts with:



                        typedef struct list_s list_t 


                        Because of the lack of namespaces in C, such names can conflict with other names within the same scope and lead to a whole bunch of odd errors that may or may not be hard to track down. list_t is such a generic name, I'm not sure it is appropriate to use directly here, you may want to not pollute the namespace with list_t, and instead keep it as struct list_s. However there is another solution to this problem that also solves other potential namespace conflicts.



                        You may want to prefix all of your names with a sort of psuedo namespace specifier (which a lot of other C APIs do, like opengl, vulkan opencv's now defunct C api etc...)



                        I would recommend even doing this on macros as well, as they have the same problem (and this practice is also standard).



                        for example, lets say you decide to use "abc" as your pseudo namespace name. You would then change:



                        bool    list_append(list_t* list, void* element);


                        to:



                        bool    abc_list_append(abc_list_t* list, void* element);


                        yes, this is annoying, but if someone wants to use your library but wants multiple list types, or have multiple libraries called list but don't do the same thing, then they are out of luck. If you use a "pseudo namespace" then they can avoid many of these conflicts. If however, this is only supposed to be used internally in another project or is never going to be released to be used as its own library, you do not have to worry about name-spacing these components to other people, though you may still find conflicts on your own.







                        share|improve this answer












                        share|improve this answer



                        share|improve this answer










                        answered Jan 4 at 18:41









                        opaopa

                        27118




                        27118























                            3












                            $begingroup$

                            In addition to list_get, as opa mentioned, and list_size / list_length to go with it, I would include a version of list_remove that takes an index instead of an element to compare to, for the fairly common scenario where you want to see if an element is in the list, possibly do something with it, and then delete it.



                            int player_index = list_index(entity_list, "player");
                            if(player_index == -1)
                            {
                            handle_no_player();
                            }
                            else
                            {
                            handle_player();
                            list_remove_at(entity_list, player_index);
                            }


                            Also, since you're using a function pointer for equality comparison anyway, it would be easy to include a version that takes a predicate:



                            bool is_on_fire(void *entity) { return ((game_entity*)entity)->on_fire; }
                            int first_on_fire = list_index(entity_list, &is_on_fire);


                            As the name first_on_fire indicates, the third issue is that if this is representing a general list rather than a set (meaning there can be duplicate elements), then you need a version of list_index that takes a starting index to search from, so that it's possible to find the second / third / nth instance of a given element.



                            list_pop is an ambiguous name, since it's not apparent whether it works like a stack or a queue. list_pop_back would be more clear.



                            A function that inserts into the middle of a list could be useful as well.






                            share|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$


















                              3












                              $begingroup$

                              In addition to list_get, as opa mentioned, and list_size / list_length to go with it, I would include a version of list_remove that takes an index instead of an element to compare to, for the fairly common scenario where you want to see if an element is in the list, possibly do something with it, and then delete it.



                              int player_index = list_index(entity_list, "player");
                              if(player_index == -1)
                              {
                              handle_no_player();
                              }
                              else
                              {
                              handle_player();
                              list_remove_at(entity_list, player_index);
                              }


                              Also, since you're using a function pointer for equality comparison anyway, it would be easy to include a version that takes a predicate:



                              bool is_on_fire(void *entity) { return ((game_entity*)entity)->on_fire; }
                              int first_on_fire = list_index(entity_list, &is_on_fire);


                              As the name first_on_fire indicates, the third issue is that if this is representing a general list rather than a set (meaning there can be duplicate elements), then you need a version of list_index that takes a starting index to search from, so that it's possible to find the second / third / nth instance of a given element.



                              list_pop is an ambiguous name, since it's not apparent whether it works like a stack or a queue. list_pop_back would be more clear.



                              A function that inserts into the middle of a list could be useful as well.






                              share|improve this answer









                              $endgroup$
















                                3












                                3








                                3





                                $begingroup$

                                In addition to list_get, as opa mentioned, and list_size / list_length to go with it, I would include a version of list_remove that takes an index instead of an element to compare to, for the fairly common scenario where you want to see if an element is in the list, possibly do something with it, and then delete it.



                                int player_index = list_index(entity_list, "player");
                                if(player_index == -1)
                                {
                                handle_no_player();
                                }
                                else
                                {
                                handle_player();
                                list_remove_at(entity_list, player_index);
                                }


                                Also, since you're using a function pointer for equality comparison anyway, it would be easy to include a version that takes a predicate:



                                bool is_on_fire(void *entity) { return ((game_entity*)entity)->on_fire; }
                                int first_on_fire = list_index(entity_list, &is_on_fire);


                                As the name first_on_fire indicates, the third issue is that if this is representing a general list rather than a set (meaning there can be duplicate elements), then you need a version of list_index that takes a starting index to search from, so that it's possible to find the second / third / nth instance of a given element.



                                list_pop is an ambiguous name, since it's not apparent whether it works like a stack or a queue. list_pop_back would be more clear.



                                A function that inserts into the middle of a list could be useful as well.






                                share|improve this answer









                                $endgroup$



                                In addition to list_get, as opa mentioned, and list_size / list_length to go with it, I would include a version of list_remove that takes an index instead of an element to compare to, for the fairly common scenario where you want to see if an element is in the list, possibly do something with it, and then delete it.



                                int player_index = list_index(entity_list, "player");
                                if(player_index == -1)
                                {
                                handle_no_player();
                                }
                                else
                                {
                                handle_player();
                                list_remove_at(entity_list, player_index);
                                }


                                Also, since you're using a function pointer for equality comparison anyway, it would be easy to include a version that takes a predicate:



                                bool is_on_fire(void *entity) { return ((game_entity*)entity)->on_fire; }
                                int first_on_fire = list_index(entity_list, &is_on_fire);


                                As the name first_on_fire indicates, the third issue is that if this is representing a general list rather than a set (meaning there can be duplicate elements), then you need a version of list_index that takes a starting index to search from, so that it's possible to find the second / third / nth instance of a given element.



                                list_pop is an ambiguous name, since it's not apparent whether it works like a stack or a queue. list_pop_back would be more clear.



                                A function that inserts into the middle of a list could be useful as well.







                                share|improve this answer












                                share|improve this answer



                                share|improve this answer










                                answered Jan 4 at 21:18









                                ErrorsatzErrorsatz

                                6837




                                6837























                                    3












                                    $begingroup$

                                    Probably pedantic, but your code could be more robust to errors without significant changes. In your constructor, you could fail-fast the element_delete and not worry about it in your destructor. Instead of going though serially and initialising one by one in create_list, consider setting values to the default first before calling malloc; then you're always in a valid state.



                                    /* The newly created list or a null pointer and errno is set, (probably, it
                                    depends what standard you're using for it to be guaranteed.) */
                                    list_t* list_create(
                                    const uint16_t initial_capacity,
                                    const bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                    const void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                    {
                                    list_t* list;

                                    /* Pre-conditions. */
                                    if(!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                    errno = EDOM;
                                    return NULL;
                                    }

                                    list = malloc(sizeof *list);
                                    if (!list) return NULL; /* The malloc will (probably) set the errno. */
                                    list->length = 0;
                                    list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                    list->elements = NULL;
                                    list->element_match = element_match;
                                    list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                    /* This could fail, so it's after initialisation. */
                                    list->elements = malloc(sizeof *list->elements * initial_capacity);
                                    if (!list->elements) {
                                    list_delete(list);
                                    return NULL;
                                    }

                                    return list;
                                    }

                                    /* If the list has been initialised, this will work regardless. */
                                    void list_delete(const list_t* list)
                                    {
                                    unsigned i;
                                    if (!list) return;
                                    for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
                                    list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                    }
                                    free(list->elements);
                                    free(list);
                                    }


                                    (I haven't tested this. You will need to #include <errno.h>.)






                                    share|improve this answer











                                    $endgroup$


















                                      3












                                      $begingroup$

                                      Probably pedantic, but your code could be more robust to errors without significant changes. In your constructor, you could fail-fast the element_delete and not worry about it in your destructor. Instead of going though serially and initialising one by one in create_list, consider setting values to the default first before calling malloc; then you're always in a valid state.



                                      /* The newly created list or a null pointer and errno is set, (probably, it
                                      depends what standard you're using for it to be guaranteed.) */
                                      list_t* list_create(
                                      const uint16_t initial_capacity,
                                      const bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                      const void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                      {
                                      list_t* list;

                                      /* Pre-conditions. */
                                      if(!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                      errno = EDOM;
                                      return NULL;
                                      }

                                      list = malloc(sizeof *list);
                                      if (!list) return NULL; /* The malloc will (probably) set the errno. */
                                      list->length = 0;
                                      list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                      list->elements = NULL;
                                      list->element_match = element_match;
                                      list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                      /* This could fail, so it's after initialisation. */
                                      list->elements = malloc(sizeof *list->elements * initial_capacity);
                                      if (!list->elements) {
                                      list_delete(list);
                                      return NULL;
                                      }

                                      return list;
                                      }

                                      /* If the list has been initialised, this will work regardless. */
                                      void list_delete(const list_t* list)
                                      {
                                      unsigned i;
                                      if (!list) return;
                                      for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
                                      list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                      }
                                      free(list->elements);
                                      free(list);
                                      }


                                      (I haven't tested this. You will need to #include <errno.h>.)






                                      share|improve this answer











                                      $endgroup$
















                                        3












                                        3








                                        3





                                        $begingroup$

                                        Probably pedantic, but your code could be more robust to errors without significant changes. In your constructor, you could fail-fast the element_delete and not worry about it in your destructor. Instead of going though serially and initialising one by one in create_list, consider setting values to the default first before calling malloc; then you're always in a valid state.



                                        /* The newly created list or a null pointer and errno is set, (probably, it
                                        depends what standard you're using for it to be guaranteed.) */
                                        list_t* list_create(
                                        const uint16_t initial_capacity,
                                        const bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                        const void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                        {
                                        list_t* list;

                                        /* Pre-conditions. */
                                        if(!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                        errno = EDOM;
                                        return NULL;
                                        }

                                        list = malloc(sizeof *list);
                                        if (!list) return NULL; /* The malloc will (probably) set the errno. */
                                        list->length = 0;
                                        list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                        list->elements = NULL;
                                        list->element_match = element_match;
                                        list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                        /* This could fail, so it's after initialisation. */
                                        list->elements = malloc(sizeof *list->elements * initial_capacity);
                                        if (!list->elements) {
                                        list_delete(list);
                                        return NULL;
                                        }

                                        return list;
                                        }

                                        /* If the list has been initialised, this will work regardless. */
                                        void list_delete(const list_t* list)
                                        {
                                        unsigned i;
                                        if (!list) return;
                                        for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
                                        list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                        }
                                        free(list->elements);
                                        free(list);
                                        }


                                        (I haven't tested this. You will need to #include <errno.h>.)






                                        share|improve this answer











                                        $endgroup$



                                        Probably pedantic, but your code could be more robust to errors without significant changes. In your constructor, you could fail-fast the element_delete and not worry about it in your destructor. Instead of going though serially and initialising one by one in create_list, consider setting values to the default first before calling malloc; then you're always in a valid state.



                                        /* The newly created list or a null pointer and errno is set, (probably, it
                                        depends what standard you're using for it to be guaranteed.) */
                                        list_t* list_create(
                                        const uint16_t initial_capacity,
                                        const bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                        const void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                        {
                                        list_t* list;

                                        /* Pre-conditions. */
                                        if(!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                        errno = EDOM;
                                        return NULL;
                                        }

                                        list = malloc(sizeof *list);
                                        if (!list) return NULL; /* The malloc will (probably) set the errno. */
                                        list->length = 0;
                                        list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                        list->elements = NULL;
                                        list->element_match = element_match;
                                        list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                        /* This could fail, so it's after initialisation. */
                                        list->elements = malloc(sizeof *list->elements * initial_capacity);
                                        if (!list->elements) {
                                        list_delete(list);
                                        return NULL;
                                        }

                                        return list;
                                        }

                                        /* If the list has been initialised, this will work regardless. */
                                        void list_delete(const list_t* list)
                                        {
                                        unsigned i;
                                        if (!list) return;
                                        for (i = 0; i < list->length; i++) {
                                        list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                        }
                                        free(list->elements);
                                        free(list);
                                        }


                                        (I haven't tested this. You will need to #include <errno.h>.)







                                        share|improve this answer














                                        share|improve this answer



                                        share|improve this answer








                                        edited Jan 11 at 20:15

























                                        answered Jan 11 at 1:15









                                        Neil EdelmanNeil Edelman

                                        282110




                                        282110























                                            0












                                            $begingroup$

                                            For anyone curious, here's my code with the comments taken on board:



                                            Header



                                            #ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
                                            #define __TYPE_LIST_H__

                                            /* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
                                            (has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
                                            functions)
                                            */

                                            typedef struct sdlui_list_s sdlui_list_t;

                                            #include <stdbool.h>
                                            #include <stdint.h>

                                            sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                            uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                            bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                            void (*element_delete)(void* element));

                                            void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list);

                                            bool sdlui_list_append (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                            bool sdlui_list_pop_back (sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret);
                                            bool sdlui_list_get (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret);
                                            bool sdlui_list_remove (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                            bool sdlui_list_remove_at (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index);
                                            void sdlui_list_shift (sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index);
                                            int64_t sdlui_list_index (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                            int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                            int64_t start_index);
                                            bool sdlui_list_contains (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                            bool sdlui_list_empty (sdlui_list_t* list);
                                            uint32_t sdlui_list_length (sdlui_list_t* list);

                                            #endif


                                            Source



                                            #include <errno.h>
                                            #include <stdio.h>
                                            #include <stdlib.h>

                                            #include <type/list.h>

                                            struct sdlui_list_s
                                            {
                                            uint32_t length;
                                            uint32_t capacity;
                                            void** elements;
                                            bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
                                            void (*element_delete)(void* element);
                                            };

                                            sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                            uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                            bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                            void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                            {
                                            sdlui_list_t* list;

                                            if (!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                            errno = EDOM;
                                            return NULL;
                                            }
                                            list = (sdlui_list_t*) malloc(sizeof(sdlui_list_t));
                                            if (!list) return NULL;

                                            list->length = 0;
                                            list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                            list->element_match = element_match;
                                            list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                            list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(list->elements[0]) * initial_capacity);
                                            if (!list->elements) {
                                            sdlui_list_delete(list);
                                            return NULL;
                                            }
                                            return list;
                                            }

                                            void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                            {
                                            unsigned i;
                                            for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
                                            list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                            }
                                            free(list->elements);
                                            free(list);
                                            }

                                            bool sdlui_list_append(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                            {
                                            if (!list)
                                            return false;
                                            if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
                                            // expand the elements array
                                            list->capacity *= 2;
                                            list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
                                            if (!list->elements) {
                                            return false;
                                            }
                                            }
                                            list->elements[list->length++] = element;
                                            return true;
                                            }

                                            bool sdlui_list_get(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret) {
                                            if (!list || index > list->length) {
                                            return false;
                                            }
                                            ret = list->elements[index];
                                            return true;
                                            }

                                            bool sdlui_list_pop_back(sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret)
                                            {
                                            if (!list || sdlui_list_empty(list)) {
                                            return false;
                                            }
                                            ret = list->elements[list->length];
                                            list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
                                            list->length--;
                                            return true;
                                            }

                                            bool sdlui_list_remove(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                            {
                                            int64_t i = sdlui_list_index(list, element);

                                            if (i == -1) {
                                            return false;
                                            }

                                            sdlui_list_shift(list, i);
                                            list->length--;
                                            return true;
                                            }

                                            bool sdlui_list_remove_at(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index)
                                            {
                                            if (list->length == 0) {
                                            return false;
                                            }
                                            sdlui_list_shift(list, index);
                                            list->length--;
                                            return true;
                                            }

                                            void sdlui_list_shift(sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index)
                                            {
                                            while ((uint32_t)start_index < list->length - 1) {
                                            list->elements[start_index] = list->elements[start_index+1];
                                            start_index++;
                                            }
                                            }

                                            int64_t sdlui_list_index(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                            {
                                            return sdlui_list_index_from(list, element, 0);
                                            }

                                            int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                            int64_t start_index)
                                            {
                                            if (!list->element_match || list->length < (uint32_t) start_index) {
                                            /* No way to compare */
                                            return -1;
                                            }
                                            uint32_t i;
                                            for (i = start_index; i < list->length; i++) {
                                            if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
                                            return i;
                                            }
                                            }
                                            return -1;
                                            }


                                            bool sdlui_list_contains(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element) {
                                            return (sdlui_list_index(list, element) != -1);
                                            }

                                            bool sdlui_list_empty(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                            {
                                            if (!list) {
                                            return false;
                                            }
                                            else {
                                            return (list->length == 0);
                                            }
                                            }

                                            uint32_t sdlui_list_length(sdlui_list_t* list) {
                                            return list->length;
                                            }





                                            share|improve this answer









                                            $endgroup$


















                                              0












                                              $begingroup$

                                              For anyone curious, here's my code with the comments taken on board:



                                              Header



                                              #ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
                                              #define __TYPE_LIST_H__

                                              /* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
                                              (has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
                                              functions)
                                              */

                                              typedef struct sdlui_list_s sdlui_list_t;

                                              #include <stdbool.h>
                                              #include <stdint.h>

                                              sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                              uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                              bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                              void (*element_delete)(void* element));

                                              void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list);

                                              bool sdlui_list_append (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                              bool sdlui_list_pop_back (sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret);
                                              bool sdlui_list_get (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret);
                                              bool sdlui_list_remove (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                              bool sdlui_list_remove_at (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index);
                                              void sdlui_list_shift (sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index);
                                              int64_t sdlui_list_index (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                              int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                              int64_t start_index);
                                              bool sdlui_list_contains (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                              bool sdlui_list_empty (sdlui_list_t* list);
                                              uint32_t sdlui_list_length (sdlui_list_t* list);

                                              #endif


                                              Source



                                              #include <errno.h>
                                              #include <stdio.h>
                                              #include <stdlib.h>

                                              #include <type/list.h>

                                              struct sdlui_list_s
                                              {
                                              uint32_t length;
                                              uint32_t capacity;
                                              void** elements;
                                              bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
                                              void (*element_delete)(void* element);
                                              };

                                              sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                              uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                              bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                              void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                              {
                                              sdlui_list_t* list;

                                              if (!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                              errno = EDOM;
                                              return NULL;
                                              }
                                              list = (sdlui_list_t*) malloc(sizeof(sdlui_list_t));
                                              if (!list) return NULL;

                                              list->length = 0;
                                              list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                              list->element_match = element_match;
                                              list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                              list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(list->elements[0]) * initial_capacity);
                                              if (!list->elements) {
                                              sdlui_list_delete(list);
                                              return NULL;
                                              }
                                              return list;
                                              }

                                              void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                              {
                                              unsigned i;
                                              for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
                                              list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                              }
                                              free(list->elements);
                                              free(list);
                                              }

                                              bool sdlui_list_append(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                              {
                                              if (!list)
                                              return false;
                                              if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
                                              // expand the elements array
                                              list->capacity *= 2;
                                              list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
                                              if (!list->elements) {
                                              return false;
                                              }
                                              }
                                              list->elements[list->length++] = element;
                                              return true;
                                              }

                                              bool sdlui_list_get(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret) {
                                              if (!list || index > list->length) {
                                              return false;
                                              }
                                              ret = list->elements[index];
                                              return true;
                                              }

                                              bool sdlui_list_pop_back(sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret)
                                              {
                                              if (!list || sdlui_list_empty(list)) {
                                              return false;
                                              }
                                              ret = list->elements[list->length];
                                              list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
                                              list->length--;
                                              return true;
                                              }

                                              bool sdlui_list_remove(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                              {
                                              int64_t i = sdlui_list_index(list, element);

                                              if (i == -1) {
                                              return false;
                                              }

                                              sdlui_list_shift(list, i);
                                              list->length--;
                                              return true;
                                              }

                                              bool sdlui_list_remove_at(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index)
                                              {
                                              if (list->length == 0) {
                                              return false;
                                              }
                                              sdlui_list_shift(list, index);
                                              list->length--;
                                              return true;
                                              }

                                              void sdlui_list_shift(sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index)
                                              {
                                              while ((uint32_t)start_index < list->length - 1) {
                                              list->elements[start_index] = list->elements[start_index+1];
                                              start_index++;
                                              }
                                              }

                                              int64_t sdlui_list_index(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                              {
                                              return sdlui_list_index_from(list, element, 0);
                                              }

                                              int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                              int64_t start_index)
                                              {
                                              if (!list->element_match || list->length < (uint32_t) start_index) {
                                              /* No way to compare */
                                              return -1;
                                              }
                                              uint32_t i;
                                              for (i = start_index; i < list->length; i++) {
                                              if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
                                              return i;
                                              }
                                              }
                                              return -1;
                                              }


                                              bool sdlui_list_contains(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element) {
                                              return (sdlui_list_index(list, element) != -1);
                                              }

                                              bool sdlui_list_empty(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                              {
                                              if (!list) {
                                              return false;
                                              }
                                              else {
                                              return (list->length == 0);
                                              }
                                              }

                                              uint32_t sdlui_list_length(sdlui_list_t* list) {
                                              return list->length;
                                              }





                                              share|improve this answer









                                              $endgroup$
















                                                0












                                                0








                                                0





                                                $begingroup$

                                                For anyone curious, here's my code with the comments taken on board:



                                                Header



                                                #ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
                                                #define __TYPE_LIST_H__

                                                /* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
                                                (has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
                                                functions)
                                                */

                                                typedef struct sdlui_list_s sdlui_list_t;

                                                #include <stdbool.h>
                                                #include <stdint.h>

                                                sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                                uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                                bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                                void (*element_delete)(void* element));

                                                void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list);

                                                bool sdlui_list_append (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                bool sdlui_list_pop_back (sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret);
                                                bool sdlui_list_get (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret);
                                                bool sdlui_list_remove (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                bool sdlui_list_remove_at (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index);
                                                void sdlui_list_shift (sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index);
                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                                int64_t start_index);
                                                bool sdlui_list_contains (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                bool sdlui_list_empty (sdlui_list_t* list);
                                                uint32_t sdlui_list_length (sdlui_list_t* list);

                                                #endif


                                                Source



                                                #include <errno.h>
                                                #include <stdio.h>
                                                #include <stdlib.h>

                                                #include <type/list.h>

                                                struct sdlui_list_s
                                                {
                                                uint32_t length;
                                                uint32_t capacity;
                                                void** elements;
                                                bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
                                                void (*element_delete)(void* element);
                                                };

                                                sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                                uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                                bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                                void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                                {
                                                sdlui_list_t* list;

                                                if (!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                                errno = EDOM;
                                                return NULL;
                                                }
                                                list = (sdlui_list_t*) malloc(sizeof(sdlui_list_t));
                                                if (!list) return NULL;

                                                list->length = 0;
                                                list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                                list->element_match = element_match;
                                                list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                                list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(list->elements[0]) * initial_capacity);
                                                if (!list->elements) {
                                                sdlui_list_delete(list);
                                                return NULL;
                                                }
                                                return list;
                                                }

                                                void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                                {
                                                unsigned i;
                                                for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
                                                list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                                }
                                                free(list->elements);
                                                free(list);
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_append(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                                {
                                                if (!list)
                                                return false;
                                                if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
                                                // expand the elements array
                                                list->capacity *= 2;
                                                list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
                                                if (!list->elements) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                }
                                                list->elements[list->length++] = element;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_get(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret) {
                                                if (!list || index > list->length) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                ret = list->elements[index];
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_pop_back(sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret)
                                                {
                                                if (!list || sdlui_list_empty(list)) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                ret = list->elements[list->length];
                                                list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
                                                list->length--;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_remove(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                                {
                                                int64_t i = sdlui_list_index(list, element);

                                                if (i == -1) {
                                                return false;
                                                }

                                                sdlui_list_shift(list, i);
                                                list->length--;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_remove_at(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index)
                                                {
                                                if (list->length == 0) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                sdlui_list_shift(list, index);
                                                list->length--;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                void sdlui_list_shift(sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index)
                                                {
                                                while ((uint32_t)start_index < list->length - 1) {
                                                list->elements[start_index] = list->elements[start_index+1];
                                                start_index++;
                                                }
                                                }

                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                                {
                                                return sdlui_list_index_from(list, element, 0);
                                                }

                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                                int64_t start_index)
                                                {
                                                if (!list->element_match || list->length < (uint32_t) start_index) {
                                                /* No way to compare */
                                                return -1;
                                                }
                                                uint32_t i;
                                                for (i = start_index; i < list->length; i++) {
                                                if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
                                                return i;
                                                }
                                                }
                                                return -1;
                                                }


                                                bool sdlui_list_contains(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element) {
                                                return (sdlui_list_index(list, element) != -1);
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_empty(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                                {
                                                if (!list) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                else {
                                                return (list->length == 0);
                                                }
                                                }

                                                uint32_t sdlui_list_length(sdlui_list_t* list) {
                                                return list->length;
                                                }





                                                share|improve this answer









                                                $endgroup$



                                                For anyone curious, here's my code with the comments taken on board:



                                                Header



                                                #ifndef __TYPE_LIST_H__
                                                #define __TYPE_LIST_H__

                                                /* Generic list implementation for holding a set of pointers to a type
                                                (has to be consistently handled by the element_match and element_delete
                                                functions)
                                                */

                                                typedef struct sdlui_list_s sdlui_list_t;

                                                #include <stdbool.h>
                                                #include <stdint.h>

                                                sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                                uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                                bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                                void (*element_delete)(void* element));

                                                void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list);

                                                bool sdlui_list_append (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                bool sdlui_list_pop_back (sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret);
                                                bool sdlui_list_get (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret);
                                                bool sdlui_list_remove (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                bool sdlui_list_remove_at (sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index);
                                                void sdlui_list_shift (sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index);
                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                                int64_t start_index);
                                                bool sdlui_list_contains (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element);
                                                bool sdlui_list_empty (sdlui_list_t* list);
                                                uint32_t sdlui_list_length (sdlui_list_t* list);

                                                #endif


                                                Source



                                                #include <errno.h>
                                                #include <stdio.h>
                                                #include <stdlib.h>

                                                #include <type/list.h>

                                                struct sdlui_list_s
                                                {
                                                uint32_t length;
                                                uint32_t capacity;
                                                void** elements;
                                                bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b);
                                                void (*element_delete)(void* element);
                                                };

                                                sdlui_list_t* sdlui_list_create(
                                                uint32_t initial_capacity,
                                                bool (*element_match )(const void* a, const void* b),
                                                void (*element_delete)(void* element))
                                                {
                                                sdlui_list_t* list;

                                                if (!element_delete || !initial_capacity) {
                                                errno = EDOM;
                                                return NULL;
                                                }
                                                list = (sdlui_list_t*) malloc(sizeof(sdlui_list_t));
                                                if (!list) return NULL;

                                                list->length = 0;
                                                list->capacity = initial_capacity;
                                                list->element_match = element_match;
                                                list->element_delete = element_delete;

                                                list->elements = (void**) malloc(sizeof(list->elements[0]) * initial_capacity);
                                                if (!list->elements) {
                                                sdlui_list_delete(list);
                                                return NULL;
                                                }
                                                return list;
                                                }

                                                void sdlui_list_delete(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                                {
                                                unsigned i;
                                                for (i = 0; i< list->length; i++) {
                                                list->element_delete(list->elements[i]);
                                                }
                                                free(list->elements);
                                                free(list);
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_append(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                                {
                                                if (!list)
                                                return false;
                                                if (list->length >= list->capacity) {
                                                // expand the elements array
                                                list->capacity *= 2;
                                                list->elements = realloc(list->elements, sizeof(void*) * list->capacity);
                                                if (!list->elements) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                }
                                                list->elements[list->length++] = element;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_get(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index, void* ret) {
                                                if (!list || index > list->length) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                ret = list->elements[index];
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_pop_back(sdlui_list_t* list, void* ret)
                                                {
                                                if (!list || sdlui_list_empty(list)) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                ret = list->elements[list->length];
                                                list->elements[list->length] = NULL;
                                                list->length--;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_remove(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                                {
                                                int64_t i = sdlui_list_index(list, element);

                                                if (i == -1) {
                                                return false;
                                                }

                                                sdlui_list_shift(list, i);
                                                list->length--;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_remove_at(sdlui_list_t* list, uint32_t index)
                                                {
                                                if (list->length == 0) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                sdlui_list_shift(list, index);
                                                list->length--;
                                                return true;
                                                }

                                                void sdlui_list_shift(sdlui_list_t* list, int64_t start_index)
                                                {
                                                while ((uint32_t)start_index < list->length - 1) {
                                                list->elements[start_index] = list->elements[start_index+1];
                                                start_index++;
                                                }
                                                }

                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element)
                                                {
                                                return sdlui_list_index_from(list, element, 0);
                                                }

                                                int64_t sdlui_list_index_from (sdlui_list_t* list, void* element,
                                                int64_t start_index)
                                                {
                                                if (!list->element_match || list->length < (uint32_t) start_index) {
                                                /* No way to compare */
                                                return -1;
                                                }
                                                uint32_t i;
                                                for (i = start_index; i < list->length; i++) {
                                                if (list->element_match(list->elements[i], element)) {
                                                return i;
                                                }
                                                }
                                                return -1;
                                                }


                                                bool sdlui_list_contains(sdlui_list_t* list, void* element) {
                                                return (sdlui_list_index(list, element) != -1);
                                                }

                                                bool sdlui_list_empty(sdlui_list_t* list)
                                                {
                                                if (!list) {
                                                return false;
                                                }
                                                else {
                                                return (list->length == 0);
                                                }
                                                }

                                                uint32_t sdlui_list_length(sdlui_list_t* list) {
                                                return list->length;
                                                }






                                                share|improve this answer












                                                share|improve this answer



                                                share|improve this answer










                                                answered Jan 28 at 23:02









                                                AidenhjjAidenhjj

                                                1,3882517




                                                1,3882517






























                                                    draft saved

                                                    draft discarded




















































                                                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!


                                                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                                    But avoid



                                                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded














                                                    StackExchange.ready(
                                                    function () {
                                                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f210861%2flist-implementation-in-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                                    }
                                                    );

                                                    Post as a guest















                                                    Required, but never shown





















































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown

































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Popular posts from this blog

                                                    Questions related to Moebius Transform of Characteristic Function of the Primes

                                                    List of scandals in India

                                                    Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?