https://forum.misra.org.uk/ Thu, 05 Nov 2026 13:03:28 +0000 MyBB https://forum.misra.org.uk/showthread.php?tid=1329 Fri, 31 Mar 2017 14:15:39 +0000 mikearmagedon]]> https://forum.misra.org.uk/showthread.php?tid=1329 - on constructors so that objects can be statically initialized in compile time
- on functions that are used to initialize constant values
- on constant variables, as an alternative to constant macros (as it violates rule 16-2-2)

The main reasons for using constexpr are (a)to avoid dynamic initialization, making the system more secure, and (b)to make better use of the system's ROM memory.

The constexpr is a language extension so a deviation procedure is necessary to allow its usage.

I would like to know first, if there is any way of achieving the same without the need to write a deviation procedure?

If such is not possible, are the reasons above enough to justify a deviation procedure?

Kind regards,
Miguel Araújo]]> - on constructors so that objects can be statically initialized in compile time
- on functions that are used to initialize constant values
- on constant variables, as an alternative to constant macros (as it violates rule 16-2-2)

The main reasons for using constexpr are (a)to avoid dynamic initialization, making the system more secure, and (b)to make better use of the system's ROM memory.

The constexpr is a language extension so a deviation procedure is necessary to allow its usage.

I would like to know first, if there is any way of achieving the same without the need to write a deviation procedure?

If such is not possible, are the reasons above enough to justify a deviation procedure?

Kind regards,
Miguel Araújo]]> https://forum.misra.org.uk/showthread.php?tid=1213 Mon, 09 Nov 2015 13:52:44 +0000 Insane Vent Storm]]> https://forum.misra.org.uk/showthread.php?tid=1213 1) #'define MaxTracksConst 8

2) const Rhp_int32_t MaxTracksConst(8);

3) enum %s {one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, MaxTracksConst}

but our LDRA MISRA checker finds fault with all of them ( 1. fails 16-2-2, 2. fails 3-1-1 and 3. fails 4-5-2 ).
Am I missing something, or is there an option that will pass MISRA C++ 2008 checks ?

Kind regards
Insane Vent Storm]]> 1) #'define MaxTracksConst 8

2) const Rhp_int32_t MaxTracksConst(8);

3) enum %s {one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, MaxTracksConst}

but our LDRA MISRA checker finds fault with all of them ( 1. fails 16-2-2, 2. fails 3-1-1 and 3. fails 4-5-2 ).
Am I missing something, or is there an option that will pass MISRA C++ 2008 checks ?

Kind regards
Insane Vent Storm]]> https://forum.misra.org.uk/showthread.php?tid=867 Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:31:09 +0000 sthrjo]]> https://forum.misra.org.uk/showthread.php?tid=867