Return to Answer

*No documentation

.f file deserve overall documentation. Consider users should be able to understand what these functions do without access to the .c file.

Bug: al_contains()

al_contains() returns 0 when data is not found or if data != 0.

Did OP want al_contains() to return the index when found?

Unclear return

al_find() returns -1 when data not found, yet -1 is a valid data. Consider a different approach.

Use const

For functions that do not modify the state of the list:
Example:

//int al_is_valid_index(struct array_list *list, int index);
int al_is_valid_index(const struct array_list *list, int index);

Include first

In array_list.c,code #include "array_list.h" first to test that it does not rely on any <.h> files that it does not include itself.

Why 10?

Zero is a better choice for AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY.

Often the list are used, there are many empty ones. Zero is a natural choice.

If concerned about a lot of initial re-allocations, simply jump use to 10 when first needed.

Name space

Code uses al_... and array_list.... Use one,

static??

static const int AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY = 16; serves no purpose in the .h file.

Order?

With so many functions, consider alphabetizing the order in both .v and .h/

Mixed indexing types

Code using int and size_t for the array indexing and sizing type. Suggest size_t throughout.

Pedantic growth

Insure capacity + capacity / 2 does not overflow.

More functions

Consider:

A right-size function to reduce the allocation to the needed size.

With al_find() and al_find_last(), perhaps a find_next(... index) to pickup after al_find().

A definitely better than average effort.

No documentation

.h file deserves overall documentation. Consider users should be able to understand what these functions do without access to the .c file.

Bug: al_contains()

al_contains() returns 0 when data is not found or if data != 0.

Did OP want al_contains() to return the index when found?

Hide it

struct array_list definition not needed in .h file. Only its declaration needed. Research Information hiding

Unclear return

al_find() returns -1 when data not found, yet -1 is a valid data. Consider a different approach.

Use const

For functions that do not modify the state of the list:
Example:

//int al_is_valid_index(struct array_list *list, int index);
int al_is_valid_index(const struct array_list *list, int index);

Include first

In array_list.c,code #include "array_list.h" first to test that it does not rely on any <.h> files that it does not include itself.

Why 10?

Zero is a better choice for AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY.

Often the list are used, there are many empty ones. Zero is a natural choice.

If concerned about a lot of initial re-allocations, simply jump use to 10 when first needed.

Name space

Code uses al_... and array_list.... Use one,

static??

static const int AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY = 16; serves no purpose in the .h file.

Order?

With so many functions, consider alphabetizing the order in both .c and .h.

Mixed indexing types

Code using int and size_t for the array indexing and sizing type. Suggest size_t throughout.

Pedantic growth

Insure capacity + capacity / 2 does not overflow.

More functions

Consider:

A right-size function to reduce the allocation to the needed size.

With al_find() and al_find_last(), perhaps a find_next(... index) to pickup after al_find()?

Consider an apply function, one that applies a passed in function to every element of the array. I'd such this is a better way to print too and delete al_print().

int al_apply(struct array_list *list, void *state, int (*f)(void *state, size_t index, int data));

Consider al_sort(int (*cmp)(const void *e1, const void *e2)).

*No documentation

.f file deserve overall documentation. Consider users should be able to understand what these functions do without access to the .c file.

Use const

For functions that do not modify the state of the list:
Example:

//int al_is_valid_index(struct array_list *list, int index);
int al_is_valid_index(const struct array_list *list, int index);

Include first

In array_list.c,code #include "array_list.h" first to test that it does not rely on any <.h> files that it does not include itself.

Why 10?

Zero is a better choice for AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY.

Often the list are used, there are many empty ones. Zero is a natural choice.

If concerned about a lot of initial re-allocations, simply jump use to 10 when first needed.

Name space

Code uses al_... and array_list.... Use one,

**static??

static const int AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY = 16; serves no purpose in the .h file.

Order?

With so many functions, consider alphabetizing the order in both .v and .h/

Mixed indexing types

Code using int and size_t for the array indexing and sizing type. Suggest size_t throughout.

*No documentation

.f file deserve overall documentation. Consider users should be able to understand what these functions do without access to the .c file.

Bug: al_contains()

al_contains() returns 0 when data is not found or if data != 0.

Did OP want al_contains() to return the index when found?

Unclear return

al_find() returns -1 when data not found, yet -1 is a valid data. Consider a different approach.

Use const

For functions that do not modify the state of the list:
Example:

//int al_is_valid_index(struct array_list *list, int index);
int al_is_valid_index(const struct array_list *list, int index);

Include first

In array_list.c,code #include "array_list.h" first to test that it does not rely on any <.h> files that it does not include itself.

Why 10?

Zero is a better choice for AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY.

Often the list are used, there are many empty ones. Zero is a natural choice.

If concerned about a lot of initial re-allocations, simply jump use to 10 when first needed.

Name space

Code uses al_... and array_list.... Use one,

static??

static const int AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY = 16; serves no purpose in the .h file.

Order?

With so many functions, consider alphabetizing the order in both .v and .h/

Mixed indexing types

Code using int and size_t for the array indexing and sizing type. Suggest size_t throughout.

Pedantic growth

Insure capacity + capacity / 2 does not overflow.

More functions

Consider:

A right-size function to reduce the allocation to the needed size.

With al_find() and al_find_last(), perhaps a find_next(... index) to pickup after al_find().

Use const

For functions that do not modify the state of the list:
Example:

//int al_is_valid_index(struct array_list *list, int index);
int al_is_valid_index(const struct array_list *list, int index);

Include first

In array_list.c,code #include "array_list.h" first to test that it does not rely on any <.h> files that it does not include itself.

Why 10?

Zero is a better choice for AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY.

Often the list are used, there are many empty ones. Zero is a natural choice.

If concerned about a lot of initial re-allocations, simply jump use to 10 when first needed.

Order?

With so many functions, consider alphabetizing the order in both .v and .h/

More later

*No documentation

.f file deserve overall documentation. Consider users should be able to understand what these functions do without access to the .c file.

Use const

For functions that do not modify the state of the list:
Example:

//int al_is_valid_index(struct array_list *list, int index);
int al_is_valid_index(const struct array_list *list, int index);

Include first

In array_list.c,code #include "array_list.h" first to test that it does not rely on any <.h> files that it does not include itself.

Why 10?

Zero is a better choice for AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY.

Often the list are used, there are many empty ones. Zero is a natural choice.

If concerned about a lot of initial re-allocations, simply jump use to 10 when first needed.

Name space

Code uses al_... and array_list.... Use one,

**static??

static const int AL_INITIAL_CAPACITY = 16; serves no purpose in the .h file.

Order?

With so many functions, consider alphabetizing the order in both .v and .h/

Mixed indexing types

Code using int and size_t for the array indexing and sizing type. Suggest size_t throughout.