Nous utilisons des cookies pour améliorer votre expérience de navigation. En savoir plus
Accepter
to the top
close form

Remplissez le formulaire ci‑dessous en 2 étapes simples :

Vos coordonnées :

Étape 1
Félicitations ! Voici votre code promo !

Type de licence souhaité :

Étape 2
Team license
Enterprise licence
** En cliquant sur ce bouton, vous déclarez accepter notre politique de confidentialité
close form
Demandez des tarifs
Nouvelle licence
Renouvellement de licence
--Sélectionnez la devise--
USD
EUR
* En cliquant sur ce bouton, vous déclarez accepter notre politique de confidentialité

close form
La licence PVS‑Studio gratuit pour les spécialistes Microsoft MVP
close form
Pour obtenir la licence de votre projet open source, s’il vous plait rempliez ce formulaire
* En cliquant sur ce bouton, vous déclarez accepter notre politique de confidentialité

close form
I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* En cliquant sur ce bouton, vous déclarez accepter notre politique de confidentialité

close form
check circle
Votre message a été envoyé.

Nous vous répondrons à


Si vous n'avez toujours pas reçu de réponse, vérifiez votre dossier
Spam/Junk et cliquez sur le bouton "Not Spam".
De cette façon, vous ne manquerez la réponse de notre équipe.

>
>
>
V778. Two similar code fragments. Perha…
menu mobile close menu
Analyzer diagnostics
General Analysis (C++)
General Analysis (C#)
General Analysis (Java)
Micro-Optimizations (C++)
Diagnosis of 64-bit errors (Viva64, C++)
Customer specific requests (C++)
MISRA errors
AUTOSAR errors
OWASP errors (C#)
Problems related to code analyzer
Additional information
toggle menu Contents

V778. Two similar code fragments. Perhaps, it is a typo and 'X' variable should be used instead of 'Y'.

10 Déc 2016

The analyzer detected a possible typo in a code fragment that was very likely written by using the Copy-Paste technique.

The V778 diagnostic looks for two adjacent code blocks with similar structure and different variable names. It is designed to detect situations where a code block is copied to make another block and the programmer forgets to change the names of some of the variables in the resulting block.

Consider the following example:

void Example(int a, int b)
{
  ....
  if (a > 50)
    doSomething(a);
  else if (a > 40)
    doSomething2(a);
  else
    doSomething3(a);

  if (b > 50)
    doSomething(b);
  else if (a > 40)    // <=
    doSomething2(b);
  else
    doSomething3(b);
  ....
}

This code was written by using Copy-Paste. The programmer skipped one of the instances of the 'a' variable that was to be replaced with 'b'. The fixed code should look like this:

void Example(int a, int b)
{
  ....
  if (a > 50)
    doSomething(a);
  else if (a > 40)
    doSomething2(a);
  else
    doSomething3(a);

  if (b > 50)
    doSomething(b);
  else if (b > 40)    
    doSomething2(b);
  else
    doSomething3(b);
  ....
}

The following example is taken from a real project:

....
if(erendlinen>239) erendlinen=239;
if(srendlinen>erendlinen) srendlinen=erendlinen;

if(erendlinep>239) erendlinep=239;
if(srendlinep>erendlinen) srendlinep=erendlinep;   // <=
....

Unlike the previous example, the problem in this one is not clearly visible. The variables have similar names, which makes it much more difficult to diagnose the error. In the second block, variable 'erendlinep' should be used instead of 'erendlinen'.

Obviously, 'erendlinen' and 'erendlinep' are poorly chosen variable names. An error like that is almost impossible to catch during code review. Well, even with the analyzer pointing at it directly, it is still not easy to notice. Therefore, take your time and make sure to examine the code closely when getting a V778 warning.

This diagnostic is classified as:

You can look at examples of errors detected by the V778 diagnostic.