V602. Consider inspecting this expression. '<' possibly should be replaced with '<<'.

The analyzer has detected a potential error that may be caused by a misprint. It is highly probable that the '<<' operator must be used instead of '<' in an expression.

Consider the following code sample.

void Foo(unsigned nXNegYNegZNeg, unsigned nXNegYNegZPos,
         unsigned nXNegYPosZNeg, unsigned nXNegYPosZPos)
{
  unsigned m_nIVSampleDirBitmask =
    (1 << nXNegYNegZNeg) | (1 <  nXNegYNegZPos) |
    (1 << nXNegYPosZNeg) | (1 << nXNegYPosZPos);
  ...
}

The code contains an error, since it is the '<' operator that is written by accident in the expression. This is the correct code:

unsigned m_nIVSampleDirBitmask =
  (1 << nXNegYNegZNeg) | (1 << nXNegYNegZPos) |
  (1 << nXNegYPosZNeg) | (1 << nXNegYPosZPos);

Note.

The analyzer considers comparisons ('<', '>') odd if their result is used in binary operations such as '&', '|' or '^'. The diagnostic is more complex but we hope you understand the point in general. On finding such expressions the analyzer emits the V602 warning.

If the analyzer produces a false positive error, you may suppress it using the "//-V602" comment. But in most cases you'd better rewrite this code. It's not a good practice to handle expressions of the 'bool' type using binary operators: it makes the code unevident and less readable.

This diagnostic is classified as:

You can look at examples of errors detected by the V602 diagnostic.


Bugs Found

Checked Projects
412
Collected Errors
14 132
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