Welcome to the MISRA discussion forum

Dear MISRA team,

the following comparison of two values of the same type is marked as violation of 5-0-4:

The FAQ on the MISRA website https://www.misra.org.uk/FAQ/tabid/64/Default.aspx says:
We welcome active participants in our working groups who are prepared to contribute to the technical work of these groups. From time to time we ask for external reviewers to comment on drafts of our documents. Please contact us if you are interested in either of these.

MISRA Contact Details can be found here: https://www.misra.org.uk/MISRAHome/Conta...fault.aspx, but states that this is for sale of MISRA documents only and please use the Bulletin Board for all technical questions. So how can I contact MISRA if I want to get involved?

Since the publication of MISRA C:2012 and its adoption by industry and the wider C community, a number of issues have arisen, both from discussions within the MISRA C Working Group and in response to feedback via the MISRA C Forum on this bulletin board.

MISRA C:2012 Technical Corrigendum 1 provides clarification on these issues, and should be read in conjunction with the original MISRA C:2012 document.

The document is available to download from the resources section, see https://www.misra.org.uk/forum/viewtopic...241&t=1670

MISRA C:2012 Technical Corrigendum 1 - Technical clarification of MISRA C:2012

Since the publication of MISRA C:2012 and its adoption by industry and the wider C community, a number of issues have arisen, both from discussions within the MISRA C Working Group and in response to feedback via the MISRA C Forum on this bulletin board.

This document provides clarification on these issues, and should be read in conjunction with the original MISRA C:2012 document.

Attached Files

  MISRA C 2012 TC1.pdf (Size: 135.93 KB / Downloads: 139)

Rule 9.3 in MISRA C:2012 has an exception which states "An initializer of the form { 0 } may be used to explicitly initialize all elements of an array object or subobject". This means that something of the form is acceptable:

Rule 11-0-1 says that "Member data in non-POD class types shall be private" and the example clarifies that both "public" and "protected" members violate this rule. The rationale says "the implementation retains more control over how the object state can be modified".

I fail to see how protected members diminish the "control" over the object state that the implementation has. Can someone explain in more detail why protected member variables specifically are disallowed? A subtype has an "is-a" relationship with the base type, after all, so I don't see why it shouldn't benefit from inheriting the base type's member variables.

Dear MISRA team,

according to ISO/IEC 14882:2003 chapter 13.5.7 a single int is required to distinguish between prefix and postfix operators:

An empty function is the dead code? for example:
/*file1.c*/
void vidNextStep(void)
{

}
/*file2.c*/
void test(void)
{
vidNextStep();
}
I think an empty function is the dead code, because it shall be called, it means that it shall execute, but It shall not affect program behavior.
Do it?

As We know, analysis of scope is classified as single translation unit and system.
Rule 14.2 is system analyzed scope,
In my opinion, a For loop is always placed on a function, it is a code block. a loop counter it uses has no linkage.why the analysis for it shall be dependent on the other module, can anybody give a example for explanation?
thanks very much in advance!

We are appending some prefix for the typedef name as below
typedef float UI_FLOAT_32.

It shows the warning for the above line of code as
1. misra_violation: [Advisory] MISRA C-2012 Directive 4.6 violation: typedefs that indicate size and signedness should be used in place of the basic float numerical type.

MISRA Violation
Typedefs Of Basic Types With Names That Do Not Indicate Size And Signedness
MISRA advises compliance with this rule.

The same issue is not coming if we use FLOAT32..
Is there any rule for the typedef name used for float and double.