Our website uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience.
Accept
to the top
close form

Fill out the form in 2 simple steps below:

Your contact information:

Step 1
Congratulations! This is your promo code!

Desired license type:

Step 2
Team license
Enterprise license
** By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement
close form
Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

close form
Free PVS‑Studio license for Microsoft MVP specialists
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

close form
To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

close form
I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

close form
check circle
Message submitted.

Your message has been sent. We will email you at


If you haven't received our response, please do the following:
check your Spam/Junk folder and click the "Not Spam" button for our message.
This way, you won't miss messages from our team in the future.

>
>
>
V809. Verifying that a pointer value is…
menu mobile close menu
Analyzer diagnostics
General Analysis (C++)
General Analysis (C#)
General Analysis (Java)
Micro-Optimizations (C++)
Diagnosis of 64-bit errors (Viva64, C++)
Customer specific requests (C++)
MISRA errors
AUTOSAR errors
OWASP errors (C#)
Problems related to code analyzer
Additional information
toggle menu Contents

V809. Verifying that a pointer value is not NULL is not required. The 'if (ptr != NULL)' check can be removed.

Apr 16 2021

The analyzer has detected a code fragment that can be simplified. The 'free()' function and 'delete' operator handle the null pointer correctly. So we can remove the pointer check.

Here's an example:

if (pointer != 0)
  delete pointer;

The check is excess in this case, as the 'delete' operator processes the null pointer correctly. This is how to fix the code:

delete pointer;

We cannot call this fix a true optimization, of course. But it allows us to delete an unnecessary string to make the code shorter and clearer.

There's only one case when the pointer check does have sense: when the 'free()' function or 'delete' operator are called VERY many times, and the pointer, at the same time, ALMOST ALWAYS equals zero. If user code contains the check, system functions won't be called. It will even reduce the run time a bit.

But in practice, a null pointer almost always indicates some error. If the program works normally, pointers won't equal zero in 99.99% of cases. That's why the check can be removed.

Note that this warning applies to other functions that correctly process the null pointer they received as an argument, for example, the 'CoTaskMemFree' function.