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

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
GBP
RUB
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
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

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
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

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

** This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
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.

>
>
>
V5001. OWASP. It is highly probable tha…
Analyzer Diagnostics
General Analysis (C++)
General Analysis (C#)
General Analysis (Java)
Diagnosis of micro-optimizations (C++)
Diagnosis of 64-bit errors (Viva64, C++)
MISRA errors
AUTOSAR errors
Additional information
Contents

V5001. OWASP. It is highly probable that the semicolon ';' is missing after 'return' keyword.

Mar 03 2021

The analyzer found a code fragment where the semicolon ';' is probably missing.

Here is an example of code that causes generating the V5001 diagnostic message:

void Foo();

void Foo2(int *ptr)
{
  if (ptr == NULL)
    return
  Foo();
  ...
}

The programmer intended to terminate the function's operation if the pointer ptr == NULL. But the programmer forgot to write the semicolon ';' after the return operator which causes the call of the Foo() function. The functions Foo() and Foo2() do not return anything and therefore the code is compiled without errors and warnings.

Most probably, the programmer intended to write:

void Foo();

void Foo2(int *ptr)
{
  if (ptr == NULL)
    return;
  Foo();
  ...
}

But if the initial code is still correct, it is better to rewrite it in the following way:

void Foo2(int *ptr)
{
  if (ptr == NULL)
  {
    Foo();
    return;
  }
  ...
}

The analyzer considers the code safe if the "if" operator is absent or the function call is located in the same line with the "return" operator. You might quite often see such code in programs. Here are examples of safe code:

void CPagerCtrl::RecalcSize()
{
  return
    (void)::SendMessageW((m_hWnd), (0x1400 + 2), 0, 0);
}

void Trace(unsigned int n, std::string const &s)
  { if (n) return TraceImpl(n, s); Trace0(s); }

This diagnostic is classified as:

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 →
Accept