+- MISRA Discussion Forums (https://forum.misra.org.uk)
+-- Forum: MISRA C++ (https://forum.misra.org.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+--- Forum: AUTOSAR C++:2014 rules (https://forum.misra.org.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=185)
+--- Thread: A5-0-4 - Does the rule apply to range-based for loops? (/showthread.php?tid=1589)
A5-0-4 - Does the rule apply to range-based for loops? - cgpzs - 04-11-2021
Hi,
Does rule A5-0-4 apply to range-based `for` loops? Technically, range-based `for` loops are syntactic sugar for iterator-based loops, so technically pointer arithmetic is happening under the hood. Consider this example:
Code:
struct Foo /* final */
{
int x;
int y;
};
std::vector<Foo> v;
// Fill v...
for (x : v) // A5-0-4 violated here?
{
...
}The easy solution is to make `Foo` `final`, of course. But what about classes we don't have control over, like STL classes?
Code:
std::vector<std::vector<int>>
std::vector<std::unique_ptr<int>>A range-based `for` loop would be performing pointer arithmetic over `std::vector<int>*` and `std::unique_ptr<int>*`. These classes are not `final`. Would that then violate A5-0-4?
Our static analyzer is flagging these use cases as non-compliant, but it feels overly strict. What's your view on this?
Thanks!
RE: A5-0-4 - Does the rule apply to range-based for loops? - misra cpp - 12-11-2021
The short answer is that A5-0-4 is not intended to apply to range-based for loops applied to containers
RE: A5-0-4 - Does the rule apply to range-based for loops? - cgpzs - 15-11-2021
Great, thanks for the quick reply!
RE: A5-0-4 - Does the rule apply to range-based for loops? - misra cpp - 11-01-2022
This thread is now closed
Anyone having a related question, .please start a new thread