Geek asks and answers

Portable nested functions in C

Is it possible to write portable C code using nested functions / blocks?

I understand that gcc only supports nested functions as a non-standard extension, and clang only supports blocks - but is there a way to write code that will compile on both using standard C with MACROS?

If this is not possible, what works best? As an example, how can a portable version of the following form be implemented that takes a parameter? A trivial example in GCC:

int main(int argc, char*[] argv)
{
  char reverse = 0;

  int cmp_func(const void *a, const void *b)
  {
    const int* aa = (const int)a;
    const int* bb = (const int)b;
    return (reverse) ? aa - bb : bb - aa;
  }

  int list[8] = {1,2,3,4,5,20,100,200};
  qsort(list, 8, sizeof(int), &cmp_func);
}

A similar example can be built using Blocks in Clang. Ideally, the solution should be thread safe (so avoid global variables).

: , , "" C99. . , , - C99 , . char , , .. , .

2: , void , . @Quuxplusone qsort_r qsort_s. qsort_r qsort_s. void , , GCC, Clang.

typedef struct
{
  void *arg;
  int (*compar)(const void *a1, const void *a2, void *aarg);
} SortStruct;

int cmp_switch(void *s, const void *aa, const void *bb)
{
  SortStruct *ss = (SortStruct*)s;
  return (ss->compar)(aa, bb, ss->arg);
}

void sort_r(void *base, size_t nel, size_t width,
            int (*compar)(const void *a1, const void *a2, void *aarg), void *arg)
{
  #if (defined _GNU_SOURCE || defined __GNU__ || defined __linux__)

    qsort_r(base, nel, width, compar, arg);

  #elif (defined __APPLE__ || defined __MACH__ || defined __DARWIN__ || \
         defined __FREEBSD__ || defined __BSD__ || \
         defined OpenBSD3_1 || defined OpenBSD3_9)

    SortStruct tmp = {arg, compar};
    qsort_r(base, nel, width, &tmp, &cmp_switch);

  #elif (defined _WIN32 || defined _WIN64 || defined __WINDOWS__)

    SortStruct tmp = {arg, compar};
    qsort_s(*base, nel, width, &cmp_switch, &tmp);

  #else
    #error Cannot detect operating system
  #endif
}

. , , , , / .

, :

int sort_r_cmp(const void *aa, const void *bb, void *arg)
{
  const int *a = aa, *b = bb, *p = arg;
  int cmp = *a - *b;
  int inv_start = p[0], inv_end = p[1];
  char norm = (*a < inv_start || *a > inv_end || *b < inv_start || *b > inv_end);

  return norm ? cmp : -cmp;
}

int arr[18] = {1, 5, 28, 4, 3, 2, 10, 20, 18, 25, 21, 29, 34, 35, 14, 100, 27, 19};
int p[] = {20, 30};
sort_r(arr, 18, sizeof(int), sort_r_cmp, p);
+5
5

@Kirilenko , . , , , .

, .

// define lock for sort parameters
pthread_mutex_t lock;

// Parameters used in sort funciton - invert region (inclusive)
int invert_start, invert_end;

// Comparitor that uses global variables (invert_start, invert_end) as paramaters
int cmp_func(const void *a, const void *b)
{
  const int aa = *(const int*)a;
  const int bb = *(const int*)b;

  if(aa < invert_start || aa > invert_end ||
     bb < invert_start || bb > invert_end)
  {
    return aa - bb;
  }
  else
  {
    return bb - aa;
  }
}

void sort_things(int* arr, int arr_len, int inv_start, int inv_end)
{
  // Mutex lock
  pthread_mutex_lock(&lock);

  // Set params
  invert_start = inv_start;
  invert_end = inv_end;

  // do sort
  qsort(arr, arr_len, sizeof(*arr), &cmp_func);

  // Mutex free
  pthread_mutex_unlock(&lock);
}

:

input: 1 5 28 4 3 2 10 20 18 25 21 29 34 35 14 100 27 19
invert_start = 20, invert_end = 30
output: 1 2 3 4 5 10 14 18 19 29 28 27 25 21 20 34 35 100
+1

( ), , C99, "" . : https://github.com/Leushenko/C99-Lambda

:

typedef int(* fptr)(int);
func(fptr, someFunc, (void) {
    return fn(int, (int a), {
        fptr f = fn(int, (int b), { return b * 6; });
        return a * f(a + 1);
    });
})

-: C. - , , , . , , , .

, , , , , GCC Clang.

+6

C , C .
, , - , .

+4

C, gcc ( -fnested-functions). , (cmp_func) (reverse), .

0

Why bother looking for problems with nested and global functions? A 100% portable solution (even for K & R) is just to use two different functions: one to sort in the usual way, the other in the reverse order, and then call it

qsort(list, 8, sizeof(int), reverse ? cmp_func_reverse : cmp_func);

Note: there is no need to take the address of the function with &.

0
source

More articles:


All Articles