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

>
>
>
V2621. MISRA. Tag names should be uniqu…
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

V2621. MISRA. Tag names should be unique across all name spaces.

Nov 10 2021

This diagnostic rule is based on the MISRA (Motor Industry Software Reliability Association) manual for software development.

This rule only applies to C. The names of structures, enumerations, and unions must be unique for all namespaces and blocks. Reusing name tags can confuse the developer.

Look at the example:

int foo()
{
  {
    struct MyStuct
    {
      unsigned char data;                      // (1)
    };

    struct MyStuct sample  = { .data = 250 };  // ok 
  }

  // ....

  {
    struct MyStruct
    {
      signed char data;                        // (2)
    };

    struct MyStruct sample = { .data = 250 };  // error
  }
}

The 'unsigned char' type allows values from 0 to 255, and the 'signed char' type allows values from -128 to 127. After working with the first 'MyStruct' structure, the developer may get used to the fact that the member of the 'data' structure has the 'unsigned char' type. After that, the developer can easily make a mistake in the second block by writing the 'sample.data' value. This leads to the signed integer overflow.

Fixed example:

int foo()
{
  {
    struct MyStuctUnsigned
    {
      unsigned char data;                              // (1)
    };

    struct MyStuctUnsigned sample  = { .data = 250 };  // ok 
  }

  // ....

  {
    struct MyStructSigned
    {
      signed char data;                              // (2)
    };

    struct MyStructSigned sample = { .data = 127 };  // ok
  }
}

Here the names of the structures are different. Thus, it's more difficult to make a mistake.

The type alias declared via 'typedef' can duplicate the name when the developer declares 'struct', 'union' or 'enum' if they are associated with this 'typedef':

typedef struct list
{
  struct list* next;
  int element;
} list;               // ok

This diagnostic is classified as:

  • MISRA-C-5.7