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

>
>
>
V3177. Logical literal belongs to secon…
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

V3177. Logical literal belongs to second operator with a higher priority. It is possible literal was intended to belong to '??' operator instead.

Aug 05 2022

The analyzer has detected a code fragment that probably contains a logical error. In a conditional expression, the logical literal stands between '??' and another operator with a higher priority.

The '??' operator has a lower priority than '||', '&&', '|', '^', '&', '!=', '==' operators. If we do not use parentheses that define the evaluation of conditions, we may get an error similar to the one below:

class Item
{
  ....
  public bool flag;
  ....
}

void CheckItem(Item? item)
{
  if (item?.flag ?? true || GetNextCheck(item))
  {
    ....
  }
  return;
}

Since the '??' operator has a lower priority than '||', the 'true || GetNextCheck()' expression will be evaluated first. It always returns 'true', while the 'GetNextCheck' method has no effect on the result.

In this case, we can solve the problem by using parentheses for the first part of the expression:

class Item
{
  ....
  public bool flag;
  ....
}

void CheckItem(Item? item)
{
  if ((item?.flag ?? true) || GetNextCheck(item))
  {
    ....
  }
  return;
}

In the corrected version of the condition, the 'item?.flag ?? true' expression is first evaluated. Only then the '||' operator is evaluated.

This diagnostic is classified as:

You can look at examples of errors detected by the V3177 diagnostic.