c is a nice language

line 16: a ';' that is not needed ArrayLenght is sizeof(array)/sizeof(arrayType)

line 16: a ';' that is not needed ArrayLenght is sizeof(array)/sizeof(arrayType)

int arrayLength = (sizeof(track[0])/sizeof(char))*3;

int arrayLength = (sizeof(track[0])/sizeof(char))*3;

dont i need the length to know when to end the loop?

dont i need the length to know when to end the loop?

U need to know a num of elements if you want to work with array

the array is two dimensional , which holds a list of strings with the max of 80 characters, so the length would be the size of the array /80 since char only take up 1 byte

U need to know a num of elements if you want to work with array

what if the number of elements change? dont u need some way to change with the program

2-D array size = rows * colums.

the array is two dimensional , which holds a list of strings with the max of 80 characters, so the length would be the size of the array /80 since char only take up 1 byte

bug prone, and nope.

what if the number of elements change? dont u need some way to change with the program

Change the number >> change the size variable.

https://pastebin.com/ArbwLYJD

take a look at the code

line 16

there is a rogue ';'

there is a rogue ';'

i change that , but i think the main issue is else where

Humbles-MacBook-Pro:Chaptertwofive humblerise$ gcc tracklist.c -o track && ./track What Track are you looking for? Digital

when i compile , after i put in the input, the program ends

so the function itself is not working

so the function itself is not working

put some testing printfs in all the program and see where it stops working

OOOOOH found the error

if (strstr (track[counter], CompareTrack) != NULL)

Pointers are not valid to use in if statements. They never give a true or false, as they're not numbers.

Pointers are not valid to use in if statements. They never give a true or false, as they're not numbers.

this seems like the issue, i figured it was the if statement

huh pretty sure NULL is falsy and all other pointers truthy

Did it wprk?

huh pretty sure NULL is falsy and all other pointers truthy

Nopey. they're always or falsy ot truthy

I'm pretty much 100% sure only NULL is falsy

Did it wprk?

not at all lmao

comparisons like if (!pointer) ... is pretty common after memory allocation to test if it failed

comparisons like if (!pointer) ... is pretty common after memory allocation to test if it failed

We always use if(pointer == NULL) lol

so if definitely somewhere in the if statement

huh pretty sure NULL is falsy and all other pointers truthy

can you take a look at my code please

Pointers are not valid to use in if statements. They never give a true or false, as they're not numbers.

Pop into my oven! https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/NJWtzu

Don't do this @ work!

Pop into my oven! https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/NJWtzu

https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/P3im6v

Pop into my oven! https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/NJWtzu

If you do not point at null, it'll always point somewhere, that can or not be NULL

If you do not point at null, it'll always point somewhere, that can or not be NULL

So u think u are clever now huh?!

So u think u are clever now huh?!

just take out the first comparison and see for yourself.

just take out the first comparison and see for yourself.

So u think you're clever now ?!

just take out the first comparison and see for yourself.

lol you didn't remember to strip the newline from fgets

lol you didn't remember to strip the newline from fgets

let me get it done

that was why the comparison always failed, do that then your program will work correctly

that was why the comparison always failed, do that then your program will work correctly

just tried it with scanf, worked like a charm lol but the book wants me to use fgets

you can use fgets you just need to replace the \n at the end with \0

you can use fgets you just need to replace the \n at the end with \0

is using a for loop the only way to do so ?

yeah, it doesn't return the number of characters read so you'll have to loop to find the \n

#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> char track[][80] = {"Digital Dash","Cold Winter","Cruel Summer","The Cool","twenty two 2s"}; // track takes up 80 bytes for each string, so 400 with 5 elements void find_track(char *CompareTrack){ int arrayLength = (sizeof(track)/80); for(int counter = 0; counter < arrayLength;counter++){ if(strstr(track[counter], CompareTrack)){ printf("%s is in Our PlayList!\n", track[counter]); } } } int main(){ char inputTrack[80]; puts("What Track are you looking for?"); fgets(inputTrack, 80, stdin); for(int i = 0; i < 80; i++){ if(inputTrack[i] == '\n'){ inputTrack[i] = '\0'; break; } } find_track(inputTrack); return 0; }

this is the final product , works now

A quick question. The register variables can be stored in cpu registers and stacks or cpu registers alone?

A quick question. The register variables can be stored in cpu registers and stacks or cpu registers alone?

Both

/rules

A quick question. The register variables can be stored in cpu registers and stacks or cpu registers alone?

What do you mean by register variable? The keyword is no longer valid c++ and was meant to be a hint for the compiler. In C it is still a hint to the compiler to store the variable in a cpu register, that can be freely ignored. Additionally you cannot get the address of it.

Are there ever times where you’re like, why am I doing this? It’s so time consuming and confusing at times

A quick question. The register variables can be stored in cpu registers and stacks or cpu registers alone?

register is now fully synonymous for auto, variables of both classes can be stored either in a register or in the stack memory.

https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-9/changes.html

A quick question. The register variables can be stored in cpu registers and stacks or cpu registers alone?

In modern C++, the keyword register was removed as storage class specifier, but it's still reserved

Every node in the linked list will have a number. Find out if the linked list nodes can be part of a febonnacci series. Retain the nodes that are part of the series and delete thsoe those which are not.. Guys plss help me out with febonnacci function... To remove those which are not part of

Every node in the linked list will have a number. Find out if the linked list nodes can be part of a febonnacci series. Retain the nodes that are part of the series and delete thsoe those which are not.. Guys plss help me out with febonnacci function... To remove those which are not part of

Do you want us to write your code?

No dude like algorithm....

No dude like algorithm....

Do you know the Fibonacci algorithm?

Yep

Yep

Well, you've all the instrument 🤔 for every member of the list, you need to know if the Fibonacci algorithm will provide that number, too

Dear admin... I cant figure out the logic hw to pass the ll to Feb function

Dear admin... I cant figure out the logic hw to pass the ll to Feb function

ll?

ll?

Linked list

Dear admin... I cant figure out the logic hw to pass the ll to Feb function

You don't have to pass it to the Fibonacci algorithm. You have to have a function that does the comparison

What do you mean by register variable? The keyword is no longer valid c++ and was meant to be a hint for the compiler. In C it is still a hint to the compiler to store the variable in a cpu register, that can be freely ignored. Additionally you cannot get the address of it.

Register in C.

register is now fully synonymous for auto, variables of both classes can be stored either in a register or in the stack memory.

Thank u

Register in C.

As being said: "In C it is still a hint to the compiler to store the variable in a cpu register, that can be freely ignored. Additionally you cannot get the address of it."

As being said: "In C it is still a hint to the compiler to store the variable in a cpu register, that can be freely ignored. Additionally you cannot get the address of it."

What if the cpu registers are fully occupied, does the remaining register variables will be pushed onto the stack?

What if the cpu registers are fully occupied, does the remaining register variables will be pushed onto the stack?

Again, it always depends on the compiler.

👍

Again, it always depends on the compiler.

I think he meant that what if the compiler said "yeah, okay this var can be stored in the register" but after the compilation there come a run-time decision that all the cpu registers are full!!

I think he meant that what if the compiler said "yeah, okay this var can be stored in the register" but after the compilation there come a run-time decision that all the cpu registers are full!!

No, it's not possible

I think he meant that what if the compiler said "yeah, okay this var can be stored in the register" but after the compilation there come a run-time decision that all the cpu registers are full!!

How can there be a run time decision that all registers are full? The compiler is weill aware if it overwrites a register or not

Okay, I'm just stating what his real question was

What do you mean by register variable? The keyword is no longer valid c++ and was meant to be a hint for the compiler. In C it is still a hint to the compiler to store the variable in a cpu register, that can be freely ignored. Additionally you cannot get the address of it.

It's a memory class for variables.

I think he meant that what if the compiler said "yeah, okay this var can be stored in the register" but after the compilation there come a run-time decision that all the cpu registers are full!!

XD

I think he meant that what if the compiler said "yeah, okay this var can be stored in the register" but after the compilation there come a run-time decision that all the cpu registers are full!!

Yes