I came up with this simple and straight-forward (i hope so) code example which should explain itself!
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
/* function header definitions */
char* getString(); //<- with malloc (good practice)
char * getStringNoMalloc(); //<- without malloc (fails! don't do this!)
void getStringCallByRef(char* reference); //<- callbyref (good practice)
/* the main */
int main(int argc, char*argv[]) {
//######### calling with malloc
char * a = getString();
printf("MALLOC ### a = %s \n", a);
free(a);
//######### calling without malloc
char * b = getStringNoMalloc();
printf("NO MALLOC ### b = %s \n", b); //this doesnt work, question to yourself: WHY?
//HINT: the warning says that a local reference is returned. ??!
//NO free here!
//######### call-by-reference
char c[100];
getStringCallByRef(c);
printf("CALLBYREF ### c = %s \n", c);
return 0;
}
//WITH malloc
char* getString() {
char * string;
string = malloc(sizeof(char)*100);
strcat(string, "bla");
strcat(string, "/");
strcat(string, "blub");
printf("string : '%s'\n", string);
return string;
}
//WITHOUT malloc (watch how it does not work this time)
char* getStringNoMalloc() {
char string[100] = {};
strcat(string, "bla");
strcat(string, "/");
strcat(string, "blub");
//INSIDE this function "string" is OK
printf("string : '%s'\n", string);
return string; //but after returning.. it is NULL? :)
}
// ..and the call-by-reference way to do it (prefered)
void getStringCallByRef(char* reference) {
strcat(reference, "bla");
strcat(reference, "/");
strcat(reference, "blub");
//INSIDE this function "string" is OK
printf("string : '%s'\n", reference);
//OUTSIDE it is also OK because we hand over a reference defined in MAIN
// and not defined in this scope (local), which is destroyed after the function finished
}
When compiling it, you get the [intended] warning:
me@box:~$ gcc -o example.o example.c
example.c: In function ‘getStringNoMalloc’:
example.c:58:16: warning: function returns address of local variable [-Wreturn-local-addr]
return string; //but after returning.. it is NULL? :)
^~~~~~
...basically what we are discussing here!
running my example yields this output:
me@box:~$ ./example.o
string : 'bla/blub'
MALLOC ### a = bla/blub
string : 'bla/blub'
NO MALLOC ### b = (null)
string : 'bla/blub'
CALLBYREF ### c = bla/blub
Theory:
This has been answered very nicely by User @phoxis.
Basically think about it this way: Everything inbetween { and } is local scope, thus by the C-Standard is "undefined" outside.
By using malloc you take memory from the HEAP (programm scope) and not from the STACK (function scope) - thus its 'visible' from outside.
The second correct way to do it is call-by-reference. Here you define the var inside the parent-scope, thus it is using the STACK (because the parent scope is the main()).
Summary:
3 Ways to do it, One of them false. C is kind of to clumsy to just have a function return a dynamically sized String. Either you have to malloc and then free it, or you have to call-by-reference. Or use C++ ;)