Iterating over a linked list in C

Check out our Discord server: / discord

[@n33to]

Sir, you are an excellent teacher and I thank you for your hard work.

[@anabrr]

You are incredible, I don't know what would I do without you. Thank you so much!!

[@ayushmanpraxri7063]

Sir you're awesome thank you so much Makin these videos free you've cleared all of my doubts please keep making more data structures videos thanks again

[@memenator185]

I learned a lot from your videos, thank you so much :)

[@unexxzzz8186]

Sir, You are a true legend thanks alot

[@ThatiMoreira]

Thanks a lot! Your videos are helping me so much!!!

[@abdulazizalramadan801]

Man thank you very much iam struggling in my data structure subject and u helped me alot with this linked list videos

[@idomark1238]

bro gonna help me pass the next semester thank you sir

[@benogega2543]

An excellent explanation......

[@jenny127832]

Very helpful, thank you!

[@user-jv7of9tp6g]

Just fantastic🌷

[@adirk1259]

Thanks you master teacher

[@flames1087]

I Love your Teaching 💖

[@alasassi960]

what a great teacher

[@loukman4191]

Thank you 💕

[@vambans2412]

Great course

[@PachucoDesigns]

Can you explain to me the difference between using arrow and using dot when referencing an attribute of a node? Because curr->x and curr.x seem to do the same thing.

[@CodeVault]

curr.x; // Gets the x property from curr (where curr is a struct type) curr->x; // Gets the x property from curr (where curr is of pointer to struct type) Essentially, curr->x is a shorthand for (*curr).x, dereferencing curr then accessing the x property

[@alexneagoe5258]

I think this was very good, thank you for this, it was an instant subscribe! I have a question. could the loop that you have used for printing, be modified in order to be used to with free? I could make the while loop work by swaping a temp value assigned with the next node with the current node value after free and using the current node !=NULL in the condition, but with for loop it wouldn't work, I would get funny valgrind errors (either would free the heap but with stack errors, or would memory leak the heap).

[@CodeVault]

Cred ca asta ar trebui sa functioneze, am scos incrementul din for loop ca trebuie sa ai o variabila auxiliara dupa cum ai zis: for (Node* curr = &root; curr != NULL;) { Node* aux = curr->next; free(curr); curr = aux; } I guess, daca chiar vrei incrementul poti sa faci asta: Node* aux; for (Node* curr = &root; curr != NULL; curr = aux) { Node* aux = curr->next; free(curr); }

[@alexneagoe5258]

​@@CodeVault salutare și mulțumesc de replyul foarte rapid, nu mi-am dat seama prima oară de unde ești. Am încercat ambele variante și au mers fără probleme (nu știam că pot face asta, sunt foarte bucuros că for loop poate fi manipulat cu un increment oarecum fake) // for loop without increment for(node *tmp = list; tmp != NULL;) { tmp = list->next; free(list); list = tmp; } // for loop with increment for(node *tmp = list; tmp != NULL; list = tmp) { tmp = list->next; free(list); } valgrind îmi arată că e totul ok!! Mulțumesc încă o dată, am învățat ceva nou și voi avea grijă să mă uit la celelalte materiale pe care le ai pentru C. Sunt la început deocamdată :)

[@CodeVault]

Mult succes in continuare!

[@karimdhrif6679]

i love you man

[@fadieid5638]

Thank you for this amazing explanation. Just wondering, shouldn't we cast the malloc(sizeof(Node)) into a pointer to Node? malloc return void* type and we are assigning it to Node*

[@CodeVault]

I did some research on this and, in C++ it's recommended you cast the result of malloc, in C it is not

[@fadieid5638]

Thank you, Intellisense on VS code was turning on this red squiggly line under the malloc signaling type mismatch

[@huseynadze7933]

Hello, is stopping the iteration with ==NULL always safe? can't we mark the last one with "tail pointer" while adjusting to our linked list, and then while iterating we can check if the the current is equal to "tail"?

[@CodeVault]

It's not quite safe if you end up with cycles in the linked list (it can iterate forever)... The solution you wrote wouldn't be much safer since the cycle could end up not including the tail node thus iterating forever again

[@huseynadze7933]

@@CodeVault makes sense, thank you :)

[@C0D3O]

thank you:) but do you know how to iterate elements in a vue recycler scroller list??????:)

[@CodeVault]

I don't know much about vue

[@forheuristiclifeksh7836]

1:44

[@mongraal2272]

but root should be on heap,not on stack

[@CodeVault]

In our case it's on the stack because of the definition (Node root). But you can define it on the heap if you want