Our website uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience.
Accept
to the top
close form

Fill out the form in 2 simple steps below:

Your contact information:

Step 1
Congratulations! This is your promo code!

Desired license type:

Step 2
Team license
Enterprise license
** By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement
close form
Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

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

close form
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

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

close form
check circle
Message submitted.

Your message has been sent. We will email you at


If you do not see the email in your inbox, please check if it is filtered to one of the following folders:

  • Promotion
  • Updates
  • Spam

Webinar: Evaluation - 05.12

>
>
>
V2009. Consider passing the 'Foo' argum…
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++)
OWASP errors (C#)
Problems related to code analyzer
Additional information
toggle menu Contents

V2009. Consider passing the 'Foo' argument as a pointer/reference to const.

Nov 26 2019

This diagnostic rule was added at users' request.

The analyzer suggests that a function argument should be made a constant one.

This warning is generated in the following cases:

  • The argument is an instance of a structure or a class which is passed into the function by reference but not modified inside the function body;
  • The argument is a pointer to non-constant type, but it is used only for data reading.

This diagnostic may help you in code refactoring or preventing software errors in the future.

Consider the following sample:

void foo(int *a)
{
  int b = a[0] + a[1] + a[2];
  .... 'a' variable is not used anymore
}

It is better to make the 'a' argument to point on a constant value. Therefore, it makes it clear that the argument is used for data reading only.

This is the fixed code:

void foo(const int *a)
{
  int b = a[0] + a[1] + a[2];
  .... 'a' variable is not used anymore
}

Note. The analyzer may make mistakes when trying to figure out whether or not a variable is being modified inside the function body. If you have noticed an obvious false positive, please send us the corresponding code sample for us to study it.

Messages generated by the analyzer may sometimes seem pretty strange. Let's discuss one of these cases in detail:

typedef struct tagPOINT {
    int  x, y;
} POINT, *PPOINT;

void foo(const PPOINT a, const PPOINT b) {
  a->x = 1;     // Data can be changed
  a = b;        // Compilation error
}

The analyzer suggests rendering the type referenced by the pointer as constant one. It seems strange, since there is the keyword 'const' in the code. But 'const' actually indicates that the pointer is constant, while the objects that the pointers refer to are available for modification.

To make the objects themselves constant, we should do the following thing:

....
typedef const POINT *CPPOINT;

void foo(const CPPOINT a, const CPPOINT b) {
  a->x = 1;     // Compilation error
  a = b;        // Compilation error
}