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

Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Free PVS-Studio license for Microsoft MVP specialists
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

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

I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

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.

GitExtensions bugs found and analyzed

GitExtensions bugs found and analyzed

Oct 13 2016

As it is known, the Git kernel is a utility set of a command line with parameters. Usually, we use utilities that provide us with a familiar graphical interface, for comfortable work. I also happened to work with the Git utility, 'GitExtensions'. I would not say that this is the most convenient tool that I have used in my work (I liked TortoiseGit much more), but it it has full right to a place in the list of my favorite and most trusted utilities to work with Git.


Recently, I decided to check it with a static analyzer to see if it has any bugs or typos in the source code. This article is about those errors that were found in that check.


GitExtensions is a cross-platform visual client for working with the Git version control system, open source.

The GitExtensions project is rather small. In total there are 10 main projects, 20 plugins, and 2 additional projects, all of which get compiled into auxiliary libraries. In general there are 56 091 lines of code in 441 files.

Let's see if PVS-Studio is able to find anything of interest to us in this project.

The analysis results

The result of the check was about 121 warnings. To be more precise, there were 16 first level warnings (high risk). 11 of them clearly pointed to a problem fragment or an error. There were also 80 second level warnings (medium risk). In my subjective opinion, 69 of these warnings were correct, and indicated fragments that contained real bugs or typos. We aren't going to cover third level warnings in this article, because quite often they indicate fragments where the errors aren't very likely to happen. So, let's look at the bugs found.


An expression that is always true

Quite a strange code fragment opens the chart:

string rev1 = "";
string rev2 = "";

var revisions = RevisionGrid.GetSelectedRevisions();
if (revisions.Count > 0)
  rev1 = ....;
  rev2 = ....;

if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(rev1) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(rev2)) // <=

V3022 Expression 'string.IsNullOrEmpty(rev1) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(rev2)' is always true. GitUI FormFormatPatch.cs 155

The analyzer issued a warning that the expression with the check of the variables rev1 and rev2 is always true. At first I thought it was a normal typo, a little flaw in the logic of the algorithm, which does not affect the correctness of the program in any way. But after taking a closer look, I noticed that apparently, there is an extra else statement. It is located before the second check, which will be done only in case of the first being false.

One of the comparisons is superfluous

The second place in our chart is a simple typo. It does not affect the logic of the program, but this example shows really well how useful static analysis is.

public void EditNotes(string revision)
  string editor = GetEffectivePathSetting("core.editor").ToLower();
  if (editor.Contains("gitextensions") || 
      editor.Contains("notepad") || // <=
      editor.Contains("notepad++")) // <=
    RunGitCmd("notes edit " + revision);

V3053 An excessive expression. Examine the substrings 'notepad' and 'notepad++'. GitCommands GitModule.cs 691

A longer (notepad++), and a shorter (notepad), substring are searched for in the subexpression. At the same time the check with the longer string will never work, because the check with the search for a shorter string will prevent it. As I mentioned, it's not a bug, just a typo, but in another situation the innocent redundant check could turn into a potentially treacherous bug.

The variable is used before the verification against null

The third place belongs to a fairly common error, but I cannot say for sure that it will cause the program to work incorrectly, because I haven't dug too deep in the program code. The mere fact that the variable is verified against null signals a probable null value.

void DataReceived(string data)
  if (data.StartsWith(CommitBegin)) // <=
  if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(data))

V3095 The 'data' object was used before it was verified against null. Check lines: 319, 376. GitCommands RevisionGraph.cs 319

The variable data is used before the verification against null, which can potentially cause the exception NullReferenceException. If the data variable is never null, then the verification below it is useless and should be removed so that it doesn't mislead people.

There is the possibility of an exception NullReferenceException in the overridden method Equals

This bug is a lot like the previous one. If you compare two objects using an overridden Equals method, there is always the possibility that you may get null as the second comparison object.

public override bool Equals(object obj)
  return GetHashCode() == obj.GetHashCode(); // <=

V3115 Passing 'null' to 'Equals(object obj)' method should not result in 'NullReferenceException'. Git.hub User.cs 16

While continuing to call the overridden Equals method, you may get the exception NullReferenceException if the parameter obj is null. To prevent such a situation, you should use a check against null. Like this for instance:

public override bool Equals(object obj)
  return GetHashCode() == obj?.GetHashCode(); // <=

Identical expressions in the if condition

Two typos have proudly taken fifth place. They affect the program in no way, but we can categorize them as redundant checks.

private void ConfigureRemotes()
  if (!remoteHead.IsRemote ||
    localHead.IsRemote ||
    !string.IsNullOrEmpty(localHead.GetTrackingRemote(localConfig)) ||
    !string.IsNullOrEmpty(localHead.GetTrackingRemote(localConfig)) ||
    remoteHead.IsTag ||
    localHead.IsTag ||
    !remoteHead.Name.ToLower().Contains(localHead.Name.ToLower()) ||

V3001 There are identical sub-expressions to the left and to the right of the '||' operator. GitUI FormRemotes.cs 192

If you take a close look at the code, you may notice two identical conditions in the check. This is most likey due to copy-paste. Also there is the probability of an error, if we take into consideration that in the second subexpression it was supposed to use the localHead variable instead of remoteHead, but it's hard to say for sure without doing an in-depth analysis of the program algorithm.

One more similar error was found:

if (!curItem.IsSourceEqual(item.NeutralValue) && // <=
  (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(curItem.TranslatedValue) && 
  !curItem.IsSourceEqual(item.NeutralValue))) // <=
  curItem.TranslatedValue = "";

V3001 There are identical sub-expressions to the left and to the right of the '&&' operator. TranslationApp TranslationHelpers.cs 112

Unequal number of parameters during string formatting

Sixth place goes to quite a common error, which occurs because of the inattentiveness of programmers during text refactoring of the formatted strings.

Debug.WriteLine("Loading plugin...", pluginFile.Name); // <=

V3025 Incorrect format. A different number of format items is expected while calling 'WriteLine' function. Arguments not used: pluginFile.Name. GitUI LoadPlugins.cs 35

In this situation, I assume that the programmer thought the value of the variable pluginFile.Name would be added to the end of the formatted string upon the debug output, but it is not so. The correct code should be:

Debug.WriteLine("Loading '{0}' plugin...", pluginFile.Name); // <=

A part of the expression is always true

Finally, here is another typo, which could have been avoided.

private void toolStripButton(...)
  var button = (ToolStripButton)sender;
  if (!button.Enabled)
    StashMessage.ReadOnly = true;
  else if (button.Enabled && button.Checked) // <=
    StashMessage.ReadOnly = false;

V3063 A part of conditional expression is always true if it is evaluated: button.Enabled. GitUI FormStash.cs 301

Since we check that button.Enabled is false, then in the else clause of this verification, we can safely say that button.Enabled is true, and thus delete this check again.


There were many more errors, typos, and issues found in this project. But they didn't seem worth describing in this article. GitExtensions developers can easily find all the issues, using the PVS-Studio tool. You may also find bugs in your projects with the help of the aforementioned tool.

I would like to mention that the biggest benefit of static analysis is to be found with its regular use. It's not serious to download the tool and do the one-time check. As an analogy, programmers regularly review the compiler warnings, not like 3 times a year before the release. If the analyzer is used on a regular basis, it will significantly save time that is usually spent on searching for typos and errors.

Popular related articles
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…
How PVS-Studio Proved to Be More Attentive Than Three and a Half Programmers

Date: Oct 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

Just like other static analyzers, PVS-Studio often produces false positives. What you are about to read is a short story where I'll tell you how PVS-Studio proved, just one more time, to be more atte…
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…
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…
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…
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…
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 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…
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…
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…

Comments (0)

Next comments
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 →