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.

>
>
>
V722. Abnormality within similar compar…
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

V722. Abnormality within similar comparisons. It is possible that a typo is present inside the expression.

May 03 2015

The analyzer found suspicious condition that may contain an error.

The diagnosis is empirical, that is why it is easier to demonstrate it on the example than to explain the working principle of the analyzer.

Consider the real example:

if (obj.m_p == p &&
    obj.m_forConstPtrOp == forConstVarOp &&
    obj.m_forConstPtrOp == forConstPtrOp)

Because of the similarity of the variable names, there is a typo in the code. An error is located on the second line. The variable 'forConstVarOp' should be compared with 'm_forConstVarOp' rather than with 'm_forConstPtrOp'. It is difficult to notice the error even when reading this text. Please, pay attention to 'Var' and 'Ptr' within the variable names.

The right variant:

if (obj.m_p == p &&
    obj.m_forConstVarOp == forConstVarOp &&
    obj.m_forConstPtrOp == forConstPtrOp)

If the analyzer issued the warning V722, then carefully read the corresponding code. Sometimes it is difficult to notice a typo.

This diagnostic is classified as: