Andrey Karpov

Mar 05 2025

Tags:

#Cpp #Knowledge

Breaking down bugs in TDengine to master refactoring, part 1: sausage code

• Sausage code
• An error in TDengine
• Refactoring

The analysis of the TDengine project code using PVS-Studio reveals classic errors and typos. Developers could've avoided many of them if they had carefully designed the code in the first place, kept the logic simple, and avoided macros. Let's take a look at these errors and figure out how refactoring can help eliminate them completely.

Sausage code

This meme is the easiest way to illustrate what I mean.

Unfortunately, Java programmers aren't the only ones writing "sausage code". Long, hard-to-read lines of code appear when a programmer doesn't want to break them up into multiple lines and nicely format them. Since such code is difficult to read, the programmer or their team members are less likely to catch errors during the code review.

It's safe to say that long lines of code attract bugs and typos. I don't have any statistics, but I frequently find bugs using PVS-Studio in exactly this type of long, monotonous, or poorly formatted code.

An error in TDengine

Let's look at classic "sausage code" from the TDengine project.

Here it is, in the dmTransport.c (398) file.

The PVS-Studio warning: V501 There are identical sub-expressions 'msgType == TDMT_VND_S3MIGRATE' to the left and to the right of the '||' operator. dmTransport.c 398

Indeed, if we look closely, we can see that the same constant is checked twice. However, seeing this error is easy only when you know it's there. In reality, it's quite difficult to read this code and notice the repeated check.

Refactoring

Let's enhance the code. First, we'll break it down so that each line contains only one condition—this will make the typo much more noticeable.

static bool rpcNoDelayMsg(tmsg_t msgType) {
  if (msgType == TDMT_VND_FETCH_TTL_EXPIRED_TBS ||
      msgType == TDMT_VND_S3MIGRATE ||
      msgType == TDMT_VND_S3MIGRATE ||
      msgType == TDMT_VND_QUERY_COMPACT_PROGRESS ||
      msgType == TDMT_VND_DROP_TTL_TABLE) {
    return true;
  }
  return false;
}

Let's go further—we'll use table-style formatting and align everything in columns.

static bool rpcNoDelayMsg(tmsg_t msgType) {
  if (   msgType == TDMT_VND_FETCH_TTL_EXPIRED_TBS
      || msgType == TDMT_VND_S3MIGRATE
      || msgType == TDMT_VND_S3MIGRATE
      || msgType == TDMT_VND_QUERY_COMPACT_PROGRESS
      || msgType == TDMT_VND_DROP_TTL_TABLE) {
    return true;
  }
  return false;
}

Now the anomaly is clearly visible, so it would take a lot of effort to miss it.

Since we don't know the specifics of the project being checked, let's assume that the double check is just redundant, and msgType shouldn't be compared to some other constant instead. We delete it and get some more refactoring.

static bool rpcNoDelayMsg(tmsg_t msgType) {
  return    msgType == TDMT_VND_FETCH_TTL_EXPIRED_TBS
         || msgType == TDMT_VND_S3MIGRATE
         || msgType == TDMT_VND_QUERY_COMPACT_PROGRESS
         || msgType == TDMT_VND_DROP_TTL_TABLE;
}

Lovely! We also shortened the function body from 5 lines (the very first version) to 4.

Summary: by formatting code in a beautiful way, we:

• minimize the chance of a typo;
• make the code shorter;
• make the code easier to read.

#Cpp #Knowledge

0

0

0

0

SHARE

Tags:

#Cpp #Knowledge

We can email you a selection of our best articles once a month