Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Clarification for rule 9-3-3
#1
Dear MISRA team,

to me the rule text sounds like an if/else instruction for a static analysis tool vendor, e.g.:

Code:
if (static_possible[ast_cur_sym])
{
  print("[MISRA C++ 9-3-3] %s could be made static", ast_cur_sym);
}
else
{
  if (const_possible[ast_cur_sym])
  {
    print("[MISRA C++ 9-3-3] %s could be made const", ast_cur_sym);
  }
}

Can you confirm?
Thanks.

Background: in the sample code below i would expect to get "[MISRA C++ 9-3-3] nfoo::cfoo::get could be made static" while some static analyzers suggest const instead.

Code:
namespace nfoo
{
  typedef int si32;
  class cfoo
  {
  public:
    si32 get(void){return x;}
  private:
    static si32 x;
  };

  si32 cfoo::x = 0;
}
<t></t>
Reply


Messages In This Thread

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)