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

>
>
>
V564. The '&' or '|' operator is applie…
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

V564. The '&' or '|' operator is applied to bool type value. Check for missing parentheses or use the '&&' or '||' operator.

Jun 23 2011

The analyzer detected a potential error: operators '&' and '|' handle bool-type values. Such expressions are not necessarily errors but they usually signal misprints or condition errors.

Consider this sample:

int a, b;
#define FLAG 0x40
...
if (a & FLAG == b)
{
}

This example is a classic one. A programmer may be easily mistaken in operations' priorities. It seems that computing runs in this sequence: "(a & FLAG) == b". But actually it is "a & (FLAG == b)". Most likely, it is an error.

The analyzer will generate a warning here because it is odd to use the '&' operator for variables of int and bool types.

If it turns out that the code does contain an error, you may fix it the following way:

if ((a & FLAG) == b)

Of course, the code might appear correct and work as it was intended. But still you'd better rewrite it to make it clearer. Use the && operator or additional brackets:

if (a && FLAG == b)
if (a & (FLAG == b))

The V564 warning will not be generated after these corrections are done while the code will get easier to read.

Consider another sample:

#define SVF_CASTAI 0x00000010
if ( !ent->r.svFlags & SVF_CASTAI ) {
  ...
}

Here we have an obvious error. It is the "!ent->r.svFlags" subexpression that will be calculated at first and we will get either true of false. But it does not matter: whether we execute "true & 0x00000010" operation or "false & 0x00000010" operation, the result will be the same. The condition in this sample is always false.

This is the correct code:

if ( ! (ent->r.svFlags & SVF_CASTAI) )

Note. The analyzer will not generate the warning if there are bool-type values to the left and to the right of the '&' or '|' operator. Although such code does not look too smart, still it is correct. Here is a code sample the analyzer considers safe:

bool X, Y;
...
if (X | Y)
{ ... }

This diagnostic is classified as:

You can look at examples of errors detected by the V564 diagnostic.