.obsidian
.stfolder
IT
education
calculus
computer engineering
ECE1400
(not) Chapter 11 Exercises.md
C.md
Chapter 11 Exercises.md
Chapter 12 Exercises.md
Chapter 13 Exercises.md
Chapter 14 Exercises.md
Chapter 15 Exercises.md
Chapter 16 Exercises.md
Chapter 17 Exercises.md
Chapter 2 Exercises.md
Chapter 3 Exercises.md
Chapter 4 Exercises.md
Chapter 5 Exercises.md
Chapter 6 Exercises.md
Chapter 7 Exercises.md
Chapter 8 Exercises.md
Chapter 9 Exercises.md
Flowcharts and Pseudocode.md
ECE1410
ECE2700
english
Ohm's Law.md
math
nutrition
statistics
notes
personal
software
..gitignore.un~
.gitignore
.gitignore~
84 lines
3.0 KiB
Markdown
84 lines
3.0 KiB
Markdown
> **1.** Section 15.1 listed several advantages of dividing a program into multiple source files.(a). Describe several other advantages
|
|
|
|
- Easier to scale horizontally as developers are added to the team
|
|
- Reduced cognitive load from less global scope to keep track of
|
|
|
|
> (b). Describe some disadvantages
|
|
- Increased complexity
|
|
- Need to maintain/troubleshoot a build system
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
> **2.** Which of the following should *not* be put in a header file? Why not?
|
|
|
|
b. Function definitions - Functions should only be defined once, and this allows multiple files to share the same function definition
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
> **3.** We saw that writing `#include <file>` instead of `#include "file"` may not work if file is one that we've written. Would there be any problem with writing `$include "file"` instead of `#include <file>` if *file* is a system header?
|
|
|
|
Yes, `""` is a path relative to the current file, whereas `<>` is a path to the system's standard library headers.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
> **4.** Assume that `debug.h` is a header file with the following contents...
|
|
>(a). What is the output when the program is executed?
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Output if DEBUG is defined:
|
|
Value of i: 1
|
|
Value of j: 2
|
|
Value of i + j: 3
|
|
Value of 2 * i + j - k: 1
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
> (b). What is the output if the `#define` directive is removed from `testdebug.c`?
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Output if DEBUG is not defined:
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
> (c). Explain why the output is different in parts (a) and (b)
|
|
|
|
When `DEBUG` is defined, any instances of the `PRINT_DEBUG` token are replaced with a `printf` call during compile time, but when it's not defined, they're replaced with nothing.
|
|
|
|
> (d). Is it necessary for the `DEBUG` macro to be defined *before* `debug.h` is included in order for `PRINT_DEBUG` to have the desired effect? Justify your answer.
|
|
|
|
Macro invocations are evaluated sequentially, and so if `DEBUG` was defined after `PRINT_DEBUG`, then any usages of `PRINT_EVALUATION` would be have like `DEBUG` was not defined.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
> **5.** Suppose that a program consists of three source files - `main.c`, `f1.c`, and `f2.c`- Plus two header files, `f1.h` and `f2.h`. All three source files include `f1.h` but only `f1.c` and `f2.c` include `f2.h`. Write a makefile for this program, assuming that the compiler is `gcc` and that the executable file is to be named `demo`.
|
|
```makefile
|
|
demo: main.o f1.o f2.o
|
|
gcc -o demo main.o f1.o f2.o
|
|
|
|
main.o: main.c f1.h
|
|
gcc -c main.c
|
|
|
|
f1.o: f1.c f1.h f2.h
|
|
gcc -c f1.c
|
|
|
|
f2.o: f2.c f2.h
|
|
gcc -c f2.c
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
> **6.** The following questions refer to the program described in Exercise 5.
|
|
> (a). Which files need to be compiled when the program is built for the first time?
|
|
|
|
`f1.c`, `f1.h`, `f2.c`, `f2.h`, `main.c`, `main.h`
|
|
|
|
> (b). If `f1.c` is changed after the program has been built, which files need to be recompiled?
|
|
|
|
Just `f1.c`.
|
|
|
|
> (c). If `f1.h` is changed after the program has been built, which files need to be recompiled?
|
|
|
|
All source files, because they all include `f1.h`.
|
|
|
|
> (d). If `f2.h` is changed after the program has been built, which files need to be recompiled?
|
|
|
|
`f1.c` and `f2.c`.
|