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

Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
GBP
RUB
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Free PVS-Studio license for Microsoft MVP specialists
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

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

I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

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.

>
>
>
V783. Possible dereference of invalid i…
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
OWASP errors (C#)
Additional information
Contents

V783. Possible dereference of invalid iterator 'X'.

Mar 29 2017

The analyzer detected a code fragment that may result in using an invalid iterator.

Consider the following examples that trigger this diagnostic message:

if (iter != vec.end() || *iter == 42) { ... }
if (iter == vec.end() && *iter == 42) { ... }

There is a logic error in all the conditions above that leads to dereferencing an invalid iterator. This error usually appears during code refactoring or because of a typo.

The fixed versions:

if (iter != vec.end() && *iter == 42) { ... }
if (iter == vec.end() || *iter == 42) { ... }

Of course, these are very simple cases. In practice, the check and the code using the iterator are often found in different lines. If you got the V783 warning, check the code above and try to find out why what made the analyzer treat the iterator as invalid.

Here is an example where the iterator is checked and used in different lines:

if (iter == vec.end()) {
  std::cout << "Error: " << *iter << std::endl;
  throw std::runtime_error("foo");
}

The analyzer will warn you about the issue in the '*iter' expression. Either it is an incorrect condition or some other variable should be used instead of 'iter'.

The analyzer can also detect cases when the iterator is used before being checked.

Consider the following example:

std::cout << "Element is " << *iter << std::endl;
if (iter == vec.end()) {
  throw std::runtime_error("");
}

The check here is meaningless because the possibly invalid iterator has been already dereferenced. There is a missing check:

if (iter != vec.end()) {
  std::cout << "Element is " << *iter << std::endl;
}
if (iter == vec.end()) {
  throw std::runtime_error("");
}

This diagnostic is classified as:

You can look at examples of errors detected by the V783 diagnostic.

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