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: C++ semantics - 06.11

>
>
>
V3127. Two similar code fragments were …
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#)
Problems related to code analyzer
Additional information
toggle menu Contents

V3127. Two similar code fragments were found. Perhaps, this is a typo and 'X' variable should be used instead of 'Y'.

Dec 22 2016

The analyzer detected a code fragment probably containing a typo. It is very likely that this code was written by using the Copy-Paste technique.

The V3127 diagnostic looks for two adjacent code blocks similar in structure and different in one variable, which is used several times in the first block but only once in the second. This discrepancy suggests that the programmer forgot to change that variable to the proper one. The diagnostic is designed to detect situations where a code block is copied to make another block and the programmer forgets to change the names of some of the variables in the resulting block.

Consider the following example:

if (x > 0)
{
  Do1(x);
  Do2(x);
}
if (y > 0)
{
  Do1(y);
  Do2(x); // <=
}

In the second block, the programmer must have intended to use variable 'y', not 'x':

if (x > 0)
{
  Do1(x);
  Do2(x);
}
if (y > 0)
{
  Do1(y);
  Do2(y);
}

The following example is more complex.

....
if(erendlinen>239) erendlinen=239;
if(srendlinen>erendlinen) srendlinen=erendlinen;

if(erendlinep>239) erendlinep=239;
if(srendlinep>erendlinen) srendlinep=erendlinep;   // <=
....

The defect in this example is not that easy to see. The variables have similar names, which makes it much more difficult to diagnose the error. In the second block, variable 'erendlinep' should be used instead of 'erendlinen'.

This is what the fixed code should look like:

....
if(erendlinen>239) erendlinen=239;
if(srendlinen>erendlinen) srendlinen=erendlinen;

if(erendlinep>239) erendlinep=239;
if(srendlinep>erendlinep) srendlinep=erendlinep;   // <=
....

Obviously, 'erendlinen' and 'erendlinep' are poorly chosen variable names. An error like that is almost impossible to catch when carrying out code review. Even with the analyzer pointing at it directly, it is still not easy to notice. Therefore, take your time and make sure to examine the code closely when encountering a V3127 warning.

This diagnostic is classified as:

You can look at examples of errors detected by the V3127 diagnostic.