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 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.

>
>
>
V665. Possible incorrect use of '#pragm…
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

V665. Possible incorrect use of '#pragma warning(default: X)'. The '#pragma warning(push/pop)' should be used instead.

May 14 2013

The analyzer has detected an incorrect sequence of '#pragma warning' directives in the code.

Programmers often assume that warnings disabled with the "pragma warning(disable: X)" directive earlier will start working again after using the "pragma warning(default : X)" directive. It's not so. The 'pragma warning(default : X)' directive sets the 'X' warning to the DEFAULT state which is quite not the same thing.

Imagine that a file is compiled with the /Wall switch used. The C4061 warning must be generated in this case. If you add the "#pragma warning(default : 4061)" directive, this warning will not be displayed, as it is turned off by default.

The correct way to return the previous state of a warning is to use directives "#pragma warning(push[ ,n ])" and "#pragma warning(pop)". See the Visual C++ documentation for descriptions of these directives: Pragma Directives. Warnings.

Here's an example of incorrect code:

#pragma warning(disable: 4001)
....
//Correct code triggering the 4001 warning
....
#pragma warning(default: 4001)

The 4001 warning will be set to the default state in this sample. But the programmer must have intended to return the previous state used before it had been disabled. For this purpose, we should use the 'pragma warning(push)' directive before turning off the warning and the 'pragma warning(pop)' directive after the correct code.

This is the fixed code:

#pragma warning(push)
#pragma warning(disable: 4001)
....
// Correct code triggering the 4001 warning
....
#pragma warning(pop)

Library developers should pay special attention to the V665 warning. Careless warning customization may cause a whole lot of troubles on the library users' side.

Good article about this theme: "So, You Want to Suppress This Warning in Visual C++".

This diagnostic is classified as:

  • CERT-MSC00-C

You can look at examples of errors detected by the V665 diagnostic.