Go Premium for a chance to win a PS4. Enter to Win

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 954
  • Last Modified:

static string & getcwd...

working code:
// --code--
[KString-class]
/*
  KString( char* invoer, bool delete_invoer = false );
  KString( wchar_t* invoer, bool delete_invoer = false  );
*/
[CFile-class]
  static KString FileDirectory;

[KString-implementation]
/*
KString::KString( char* invoer, bool delete_invoer )
{
  wchar_t *_ptr;
  long len(strlen(invoer));

  _ptr = GiveStringOfLength(len);
  mbstowcs( _ptr, invoer, len );
  _ptr[len] = L'\0';

  UpdatePointer( _ptr );

  if ( delete_invoer )
    delete [] invoer;
}

KString::KString( wchar_t* invoer, bool delete_invoer )
{
  wchar_t *_ptr;
  long len(wcslen(invoer));

  _ptr = GiveStringOfLength(len);
  wcsncpy( _ptr, invoer, len );
  _ptr[len] = L'\0';

  UpdatePointer( _ptr );

  if ( delete_invoer )
    delete [] invoer;
}
*/

[CFile-implementation]
KString CFile::FileDirectory( _T("") );
\\ -- code --


Non-working code:
// --code--
[KString-class]
  KString( char* invoer, bool delete_invoer = false );
  KString( wchar_t* invoer, bool delete_invoer = false  );
[CFile-class]
  static KString FileDirectory;

[KString-implementation]
KString::KString( char* invoer, bool delete_invoer )
{
  wchar_t *_ptr;
  long len(strlen(invoer));

  _ptr = GiveStringOfLength(len);
  mbstowcs( _ptr, invoer, len );
  _ptr[len] = L'\0';

  UpdatePointer( _ptr );

  if ( delete_invoer )
    delete [] invoer;
}

KString::KString( wchar_t* invoer, bool delete_invoer )
{
  wchar_t *_ptr;
  long len(wcslen(invoer));

  _ptr = GiveStringOfLength(len);
  wcsncpy( _ptr, invoer, len );
  _ptr[len] = L'\0';

  UpdatePointer( _ptr );

  if ( delete_invoer )
    delete [] invoer;
}

[CFile-implementation]
KString CFile::FileDirectory( _tgetcwd(NULL,MAX_PATH), true );
\\ -- code --

Now my question is easy:
"WHY!?!" ;)

The non-working version just crashes regsvr32.exe with an "invalid access to memory location"
0
G00fy
Asked:
G00fy
  • 8
  • 5
  • 2
  • +1
1 Solution
 
itsmeandnobodyelseCommented:
Two questions:

1. Why do you call regsvr32.exe? I don't see any registry code.
regsvr32 is to register OLE-Dlls or ActiveX-Controls that have some appropriate entry functions.

2.  The only difference between woring and non-working is the statement with CFile::FileDirectory ? Or did i miss some difference? And CFile is your class, and not from MFC?

Regards, Alex
0
 
G00fyAuthor Commented:
1. Because the ATL-COM Dll registers itself by using regsvr32.exe ... And then I get this error. So I'm debugging now with the regsvr32.exe-executable...

2. CFile is my class, not MFC. The difference are the comments (watch the KString(char*,bool) and KString(wchar_t*,bool) constructors be (un)commented. Another difference is the CFile::FileDirectory statement being initialised differently.
0
 
rstaveleyCommented:
The only difference I see is

KString CFile::FileDirectory( _tgetcwd(NULL,MAX_PATH), true ); // bad
KString CFile::FileDirectory( _T("") ); // good

The problem is that you are not providing a buffer for _tgetcwd to put its data into and _tgetcwd uses malloc() to allocate the buffer. You therefore need to use free() to free it up rather than delete[].
0
Industry Leaders: We Want Your Opinion!

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

 
rstaveleyCommented:
Here's a fix:

KString CFile::FileDirectory( _tgetcwd(new wchar_t[MAX_PATH],MAX_PATH), true ); // Should work

Because this provides a buffer using new[], your delete[] should be OK.
0
 
G00fyAuthor Commented:
No it isn't ... It still keeps crashing on me :S "invalid access to memory location"

And I'm pretty sure it is with that because that's the only change I made (and before that I could run it perfectly with regsvr32.exe).
0
 
rstaveleyCommented:
Just to check that it was the only change made, can you re-confirm that changing it back to...

   KString CFile::FileDirectory( _T("") );

....works?
0
 
G00fyAuthor Commented:
sure thing... But it seems to be something with the constructor in KString that doesn't seems right...
0
 
rstaveleyCommented:
Then try...

  KString CFile::FileDirectory(L"");

...to use the wchar_t* constructor without the delete[].

You might also put some MessageBox's in there to see where is goes kaboom.

0
 
_ys_Commented:
>KString CFile::FileDirectory( _tgetcwd(NULL,MAX_PATH), true );
Ok, but the result will be malloc'ed as pointed out by rstaveley. The result would have to be free'ed - not delete[]'ed as currently implemented.

>KString CFile::FileDirectory( _tgetcwd(new wchar_t[MAX_PATH],MAX_PATH), true );
If for some reason MAX_PATH is not large enough, who going to call delete[]?
If a bad_alloc exception is thrown, who's going to handle it? Unlikely, but still worth thinking about.


Would this do what you want?

namespace
{
    TCHAR szCwd[MAX_PATH];
}

// szCwd is statically allocated, so pass false for delete_invoer
KString CFile::FileDirectory( _tgetcwd (szCwd, MAX_PATH), false );
0
 
rstaveleyCommented:
G00fy, for the sake of the PAQ, was it the case that MAX_PATH was too small? Or did you use free? Or did it become OK, when you used static allocation, but you are not sure why?
0
 
_ys_Commented:
rstaveley,

I agree. G00fy should provide some sort of insight.

My post did, after all, provide three suggestions. It is highly probable that the snippet of source code (static allocation worked). This would suggest that MAP_PATH is indeed sizeable enough. Which leads to the question - why did your snippet not do what it's [correctly] written to do?
>KString CFile::FileDirectory( _tgetcwd(new wchar_t[MAX_PATH],MAX_PATH), true );

Hopefuly G00fy can indeed provide some insight.
0
 
itsmeandnobodyelseCommented:
G00fy,

you should give the points to rstaveley because he found your bug.

_ys_,

> If a bad_alloc exception is thrown, who's going to handle it? Unlikely, but still worth thinking about.

if you have no 512 bytes of memory left you can't handle exceptions. Then, the program and perhaps the computer are dead. ;-)

Regards, Alex
0
 
rstaveleyCommented:
Please don't think I was bothered about the points. It is not knowing that I don't like. I was always a Christmas present prodder :-)
0
 
G00fyAuthor Commented:
the problem with creating a new char is, what if the path is > MAX_PATH? (I know, it's strange, but not unthinkable!).

I granted the "correct answer" to ys because he put me on the right way.

I have now in my cpp:
TCHAR szCwd[MAX_PATH+2];
KString CFile::FileDirectory( ConvertDirectory(szCwd) );
This functions free's, delete's or does whatever is necessary to prevent crashes and memleaks.

BTW, with the new []-thing it didn't worked either... It must be some strange allocation/deallocation error when using delete [] or free in a statically called (and named) variable.

I tried it with a "extern KS..., true);" and that worked fine... (so I moved it out of the class).

I hope this answer helped you guys...
0
 
rstaveleyCommented:
Thanks for feeding back, G00fy.

In restrospect, it should have used new TCHAR[] to ensure that char[] was allocated if _UNICODE was not defined rather than always allocating new wchar_t[]. Conceivably a non-UNICODE build could have had problems invoking delete[] on what it thought was a char array rather than a wchar_t array. Having said that, you should have got a compilation error if you compiled it for non-UNICODE, when _tgetcwd was substituted by _getcwd (rather than _wgetcwd) and _getcwd grumbled about the non char* parameter.

Assuming it compiled OK, I suspect that the new []-thing was tripped up by your MAX_PATH length CWD. Does this work?

  KString CFile::FileDirectory(_tgetcwd(new TCHAR[MAX_PATH+1],MAX_PATH),true);

If this works, it validates the use of delete[] in your constructor, and we can put the whole thing to bed :-)
0
 
G00fyAuthor Commented:
No, that's my point ... it seems the delete[] in my constructor freaked out when registering the dll (it worked fine nevertheless because I already registered it before, and didn't changed anything unusual but that).
0
 
rstaveleyCommented:
> freaked out when registering the dll

?? I'm not with you.
0

Featured Post

Hire Technology Freelancers with Gigs

Work with freelancers specializing in everything from database administration to programming, who have proven themselves as experts in their field. Hire the best, collaborate easily, pay securely, and get projects done right.

  • 8
  • 5
  • 2
  • +1
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now