To get a trial key
fill out the form below
Team License (standard version)
Enterprise License (extended version)
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
GBP
RUB
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Message submitted.

Your message has been sent. We will email you at


If you haven't received our response, please do the following:
check your Spam/Junk folder and click the "Not Spam" button for our message.
This way, you won't miss messages from our team in the future.

>
>
>
A common error occurring when compiling…

A common error occurring when compiling a 64-bit application: error C2440, OnTimer

Oct 10 2012
Author:

One of the most common errors a programmer encounters when porting applications from a Win32 system to a Win64 one is the error related to the function OnTimer. The function OnTimer is used nearly in every application and you are likely to get some compilation errors. Earlier (in Visual Studio 6) this function had the prototype "OnTimer(UINT nIDEvent)" and is most likely to be present in user classes in the same form. Now this function has the prototype "OnTimer(UINT_PTR nIDEvent)" and it causes a compilation error for the 64-bit system.

Here is a standard example:

class CPortScanDlg : public CDialog
{
  ...
  afx_msg void OnTimer(UINT nIDEvent);
  ...
};
BEGIN_MESSAGE_MAP(CPortScanDlg, CDialog)
...
  ON_WM_TIMER()
END_MESSAGE_MAP()

For this code, at the stage of compilation the following error will be announced:

1>.\Src\Portscandlg.cpp(136) : error C2440: 'static_cast' :
cannot convert from 'void (__cdecl CPortScanDlg::* )(UINT)' to
'void (__cdecl CWnd::* )(UINT_PTR)'
1> Cast from base to derived requires dynamic_cast or static_cast

The point is that the function type is explicitly converted in the macro ON_WM_TIMER:

#define ON_WM_TIMER() \
{ WM_TIMER, 0, 0, 0, AfxSig_vw, \
  (AFX_PMSG)(AFX_PMSGW) \
  (static_cast< void (AFX_MSG_CALL CWnd::*)(UINT_PTR) > \
    ( &ThisClass :: OnTimer)) },

The conversion goes successfully when building the 32-bit version because the types UINT and UINT_PTR coincide. But in the 64-bit mode these are different types and the function type conversion is impossible and that leads to the compilation error which is not quite clear at first.

This error is rather easy to fix. You should change the definition of the function OnTimer in the user classes. Here is an example of the corrected code:

class CPortScanDlg : public CDialog
{
  ...
  afx_msg void OnTimer(UINT_PTR nIDEvent); //Fixed
  ...
};

Sometimes the function OnTimer is used in programs more than once.

We recommend you to search for the line "OnTimer(UINT " before compilation and replace it with "OnTimer(UINT_PTR ". You may also use "find and replace" function as shown in Figure 1.

k0011_error_C2440_OnTimer/image1.png

Figure 1 - Using the function "Find and Replace" to correct the definitions of OnTimer functions

But do not forget that in the both cases there must be a space at the end of the lines. Unfortunately, you cannot see this space in the figure. If there are no spaces, you will get "OnTimer(UINT_UINT_PTR nIDEvent)".

Popular related articles
Characteristics of PVS-Studio Analyzer by the Example of EFL Core Libraries, 10-15% of False Positives

Date: Jul 31 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

After I wrote quite a big article about the analysis of the Tizen OS code, I received a large number of questions concerning the percentage of false positives and the density of errors (how many erro…
The Ultimate Question of Programming, Refactoring, and Everything

Date: Apr 14 2016

Author: Andrey Karpov

Yes, you've guessed correctly - the answer is "42". In this article you will find 42 recommendations about coding in C++ that can help a programmer avoid a lot of errors, save time and effort. The au…
The way static analyzers fight against false positives, and why they do it

Date: Mar 20 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

In my previous article I wrote that I don't like the approach of evaluating the efficiency of static analyzers with the help of synthetic tests. In that article, I give the example of a code fragment…
Technologies used in the PVS-Studio code analyzer for finding bugs and potential vulnerabilities

Date: Nov 21 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

A brief description of technologies used in the PVS-Studio tool, which let us effectively detect a large number of error patterns and potential vulnerabilities. The article describes the implementati…
PVS-Studio ROI

Date: Jan 30 2019

Author: Andrey Karpov

Occasionally, we're asked a question, what monetary value the company will receive from using PVS-Studio. We decided to draw up a response in the form of an article and provide tables, which will sho…
Free PVS-Studio for those who develops open source projects

Date: Dec 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

On the New 2019 year's eve, a PVS-Studio team decided to make a nice gift for all contributors of open-source projects hosted on GitHub, GitLab or Bitbucket. They are given free usage of PVS-Studio s…
Appreciate Static Code Analysis!

Date: Oct 16 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

I am really astonished by the capabilities of static code analysis even though I am one of the developers of PVS-Studio analyzer myself. The tool surprised me the other day as it turned out to be sma…
PVS-Studio for Java

Date: Jan 17 2019

Author: Andrey Karpov

In the seventh version of the PVS-Studio static analyzer, we added support of the Java language. It's time for a brief story of how we've started making support of the Java language, how far we've co…
The Evil within the Comparison Functions

Date: May 19 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

Perhaps, readers remember my article titled "Last line effect". It describes a pattern I've once noticed: in most cases programmers make an error in the last line of similar text blocks. Now I want t…
The Last Line Effect

Date: May 31 2014

Author: Andrey Karpov

I have studied many errors caused by the use of the Copy-Paste method, and can assure you that programmers most often tend to make mistakes in the last fragment of a homogeneous code block. I have ne…

Comments (0)

Next comments

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
This website uses cookies and other technology to provide you a more personalized experience. By continuing the view of our web-pages you accept the terms of using these files. If you don't want your personal data to be processed, please, leave this site.
Learn More →
Accept