Allocating memory for a Structure in C

Question

I'm tasked to create a program which dynamically allocates memory for a structure. normally we would use

x=malloc(sizeof(int)*y);

However, what do I use for a structure variable? I don't think its possible to do

struct st x = malloc(sizeof(struct)); 

Could someone help me out? Thanks!

Solution 1

My favorite:

#include <stdlib.h>

struct st *x = malloc(sizeof *x); 

Note that:

• x must be a pointer
• no cast is required
• include appropriate header

Solution 2

You're not quite doing that right. struct st x is a structure, not a pointer. It's fine if you want to allocate one on the stack. For allocating on the heap, struct st * x = malloc(sizeof(struct st));.

Solution 3

struct st* x = malloc( sizeof( struct st ));

Solution 4

It's exactly possible to do that - and is the correct way

Assuming you meant to type

struct st *x = malloc(sizeof(struct st)); 

ps. You have to do sizeof(struct) even when you know the size of all the contents because the compiler may pad out the struct so that memebers are aligned.

struct tm {
  int x;
  char y;
}

might have a different size to

struct tm {
  char y;
  int x;
}

Solution 5

This should do:

struct st *x = malloc(sizeof *x); 

View more solutions

Comments

[David Thornley]

Nope: sizeof(struct) is not legal. sizeof(struct st) is.

[Nikolai Fetissov]

Don't let kids play with sharp objects :)

[Ritwik Bose]

you mean struct st *x = malloc(sizeof(struct st)); struct itself doesn't actually have a size.

[dirkgently]

The thing I like the most is the fact that even if you rename the structure later, the RHS still works. Arguably, with modern editors this is not much of a problem.

[Martin Beckett]

Sorry - skimmed reading the op. I was concentrating on them asking if sizeof(any struct) was legal

[Alok Singhal]

Is is struct st or struct tm? :-)

[geocar]

Do not cast malloc(): 1. It's not needed (C void* is different than C++ void*), 2. Lint-like analysis tools could detect giving malloc() the wrong size, and 3. including the proper header will give the compiler the right hints that you mean the system malloc, which may produce better code.

[dicroce]

Awesome. No more malloc( sizeof( struct foo ) ) for me... :) (great user name also)

[Jay]

Won't RHS lead you to trouble if you do a typo error and miss *? I always thought instead of doing *x mentioning the struct name is a better way as it will protect against the typo error. Am I missing something here?

[dirkgently]

@Jay: Certainly, but that is just one of the many subtle ways in which you can inject bugs. I have read (and suffered) from forgetting to change the struct name on the RHS much more. Another counter-point: read my first bulleted item or David Thornley's comment.

[Matteo Italia]

AFAIK in C there's no such a thing as variable sized structs or abstract structs (you can fake them, but they are not supported at language level); the only case in which the compiler will tell you that it doesn't know the size of a struct is when the struct is only declared but not defined (useful if in the current compilation unit you just handle pointers to the struct).

[emeraldhieu]

@dirkgently #include <stdlib.h> struct A { int x; }; void main() { struct A st = malloc(sizeof *st); } I got this error when running on Visual C++ 6.0: "error C2440: 'initializing' : cannot convert from 'void *' to 'struct A *' Conversion from 'void' to pointer to non-'void' requires an explicit cast"