cppcheck throws warning on const std::string[]

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
9
down vote

favorite












I'm struggling with a warning that cppcheck (version 1.85 on a Linux machine) is reporting:



someFile.h:23:29: warning: Redundant code: Found a statement that begins with string constant. [constStatement]
const std::string OffOn= "off", "on";
 ^


I did some research and found that changing the statement to 



const std::string OffOn= std::string("off"), std::string("on");


removes the warning. However I do not understand what's going on, and what's "bad" about my first solution. Maybe someone can explain it to me? Or give me some reading hints!






c++ cppcheck







share|improve this question









New contributor




Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1




    Maybe it recomeds you to use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.
    – Denis Sablukov
    4 hours ago










  • @DenisSablukov that's it! And now it make perfectly sense to me. Thanks a lot!
    – Mukuma
    4 hours ago






  • 2




    I'd actually file an issue report to cppcheck. The warning message produced is really unhelpful.
    – Ruslan
    1 hour ago














up vote
9
down vote

favorite












I'm struggling with a warning that cppcheck (version 1.85 on a Linux machine) is reporting:



someFile.h:23:29: warning: Redundant code: Found a statement that begins with string constant. [constStatement]
const std::string OffOn= "off", "on";
 ^


I did some research and found that changing the statement to 



const std::string OffOn= std::string("off"), std::string("on");


removes the warning. However I do not understand what's going on, and what's "bad" about my first solution. Maybe someone can explain it to me? Or give me some reading hints!






c++ cppcheck







share|improve this question









New contributor




Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1




    Maybe it recomeds you to use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.
    – Denis Sablukov
    4 hours ago










  • @DenisSablukov that's it! And now it make perfectly sense to me. Thanks a lot!
    – Mukuma
    4 hours ago






  • 2




    I'd actually file an issue report to cppcheck. The warning message produced is really unhelpful.
    – Ruslan
    1 hour ago












up vote
9
down vote

favorite









up vote
9
down vote

favorite











I'm struggling with a warning that cppcheck (version 1.85 on a Linux machine) is reporting:



someFile.h:23:29: warning: Redundant code: Found a statement that begins with string constant. [constStatement]
const std::string OffOn= "off", "on";
 ^


I did some research and found that changing the statement to 



const std::string OffOn= std::string("off"), std::string("on");


removes the warning. However I do not understand what's going on, and what's "bad" about my first solution. Maybe someone can explain it to me? Or give me some reading hints!






c++ cppcheck







share|improve this question









New contributor




Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











I'm struggling with a warning that cppcheck (version 1.85 on a Linux machine) is reporting:



someFile.h:23:29: warning: Redundant code: Found a statement that begins with string constant. [constStatement]
const std::string OffOn= "off", "on";
 ^


I did some research and found that changing the statement to 



const std::string OffOn= std::string("off"), std::string("on");


removes the warning. However I do not understand what's going on, and what's "bad" about my first solution. Maybe someone can explain it to me? Or give me some reading hints!






c++ cppcheck




c++ cppcheck






share|improve this question









New contributor




Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 9 mins ago









Null

1,46361926




1,46361926






New contributor




Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 4 hours ago









Mukuma

483




483




New contributor




Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Mukuma is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1




    Maybe it recomeds you to use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.
    – Denis Sablukov
    4 hours ago










  • @DenisSablukov that's it! And now it make perfectly sense to me. Thanks a lot!
    – Mukuma
    4 hours ago






  • 2




    I'd actually file an issue report to cppcheck. The warning message produced is really unhelpful.
    – Ruslan
    1 hour ago












  • 1




    Maybe it recomeds you to use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.
    – Denis Sablukov
    4 hours ago










  • @DenisSablukov that's it! And now it make perfectly sense to me. Thanks a lot!
    – Mukuma
    4 hours ago






  • 2




    I'd actually file an issue report to cppcheck. The warning message produced is really unhelpful.
    – Ruslan
    1 hour ago







1




1




Maybe it recomeds you to use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.
– Denis Sablukov
4 hours ago




Maybe it recomeds you to use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.
– Denis Sablukov
4 hours ago












@DenisSablukov that's it! And now it make perfectly sense to me. Thanks a lot!
– Mukuma
4 hours ago




@DenisSablukov that's it! And now it make perfectly sense to me. Thanks a lot!
– Mukuma
4 hours ago




2




2




I'd actually file an issue report to cppcheck. The warning message produced is really unhelpful.
– Ruslan
1 hour ago




I'd actually file an issue report to cppcheck. The warning message produced is really unhelpful.
– Ruslan
1 hour ago












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
10
down vote



accepted










It recommends you use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.






share|improve this answer


















  • 2




    It's probably nitpicking, but in this context ... is not a std::initializer_list. It's a braced-init-list.
    – HolyBlackCat
    1 hour ago










  • It's clearly a bug regardless; there's no "redundant code" here
    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    10 mins ago










Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






Mukuma is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53099306%2fcppcheck-throws-warning-on-const-stdstring%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
10
down vote



accepted










It recommends you use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.






share|improve this answer


















  • 2




    It's probably nitpicking, but in this context ... is not a std::initializer_list. It's a braced-init-list.
    – HolyBlackCat
    1 hour ago










  • It's clearly a bug regardless; there's no "redundant code" here
    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    10 mins ago














up vote
10
down vote



accepted










It recommends you use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.






share|improve this answer


















  • 2




    It's probably nitpicking, but in this context ... is not a std::initializer_list. It's a braced-init-list.
    – HolyBlackCat
    1 hour ago










  • It's clearly a bug regardless; there's no "redundant code" here
    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    10 mins ago












up vote
10
down vote



accepted







up vote
10
down vote



accepted






It recommends you use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.






share|improve this answer














It recommends you use initializer_list like: const std::string OffOn"off", "on";, so = is just unnecessary.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 4 hours ago









Toby Speight

15.7k133864




15.7k133864










answered 4 hours ago









Denis Sablukov

437413




437413







  • 2




    It's probably nitpicking, but in this context ... is not a std::initializer_list. It's a braced-init-list.
    – HolyBlackCat
    1 hour ago










  • It's clearly a bug regardless; there's no "redundant code" here
    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    10 mins ago












  • 2




    It's probably nitpicking, but in this context ... is not a std::initializer_list. It's a braced-init-list.
    – HolyBlackCat
    1 hour ago










  • It's clearly a bug regardless; there's no "redundant code" here
    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    10 mins ago







2




2




It's probably nitpicking, but in this context ... is not a std::initializer_list. It's a braced-init-list.
– HolyBlackCat
1 hour ago




It's probably nitpicking, but in this context ... is not a std::initializer_list. It's a braced-init-list.
– HolyBlackCat
1 hour ago












It's clearly a bug regardless; there's no "redundant code" here
– Lightness Races in Orbit
10 mins ago




It's clearly a bug regardless; there's no "redundant code" here
– Lightness Races in Orbit
10 mins ago










Mukuma is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









 

draft saved


draft discarded


















Mukuma is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Mukuma is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Mukuma is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53099306%2fcppcheck-throws-warning-on-const-stdstring%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest
































































Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What does second last employer means? [closed]

Image
Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0; up vote -3 down vote favorite Say, for example I have worked in the following companies, Company A => 2010 - 2011 Company B => 2011 - 2012 Company C => 2012 - Till Date Company D => Have offer Now assume Company D is asking to submit documents from my second last employer. So from the list of companies given, which company would be qualified as second last employer? software-industry employer share | improve this question asked Aug 10 '14 at 5:16 Rajaprabhu Aravindasamy 559 1 6 13 closed as off-topic by Jim G., jmort253 ♦ Aug 11 '14 at 1:58 This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason: "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address...
Read more

List of Gilmore Girls characters

Image
The season three cast—(Back row): Lane, Michel, Paris, Emily, Richard, Sookie, Miss Patty, Kirk; Front row: Jess, Luke, Lorelai, Rory, Dean This is a list of characters for the comedy-drama television series Gilmore Girls . Contents 1 Main characters 1.1 Lorelai Gilmore 1.2 Rory Gilmore 1.3 Sookie St. James 1.4 Lane Kim 1.5 Michel Gerard 1.6 Luke Danes 1.7 Emily Gilmore 1.8 Richard Gilmore 1.9 Paris Geller 1.10 Dean Forester 1.11 Jess Mariano 1.12 Kirk Gleason 1.13 Jason Stiles 1.14 Logan Huntzberger 2 Major recurring characters 2.1 Christopher Hayden 2.2 Jackson Belleville 2.3 Mrs. Kim 2.4 Tristin DuGray 2.5 Max Medina 2.6 Taylor Doose 2.7 Dave Rygalski 2.8 Marty 3 Recurring characters 3.1 Stars Hollow 3.2 Chilton 3.3 Yale 3.4 Other 4 Notable guest stars 5 Unseen characters 6 Notes 7 References Main characters Actor Character Appearances Season 1 Season 2 Season 3 Season 4 Season 5 Season 6 Season 7 A Year in the Life Lauren Graham Lorelai Gilmore...
Read more

One-line joke

A one-liner is a joke that is delivered in a single line. A good one-liner is said to be pithy - concise and meaningful. [1] Comedians and actors use this comedic method as part of their act, e.g. Jimmy Carr, Tommy Cooper, Rodney Dangerfield, Norm Macdonald, Ken Dodd, Stewart Francis, Zach Galifianakis, Mitch Hedberg, Anthony Jeselnik, Milton Jones, Shappi Khorsandi, Jay London, Mark Linn-Baker, Demetri Martin, Groucho Marx, Dan Mintz, Emo Philips, Tim Vine, Steven Wright and Henny Youngman and Arnold Schwarzenegger. [ citation needed ] Many fictional characters are also known to deliver one-liners, including James Bond, who usually includes pithy and laconic quips after disposing of a villain. [ citation needed ] Examples "A baby seal walks into a club." "A dyslexic man walks into a bra." (Anonymous) "There are three types of people, those who can count and those who can't." "Venison's dear, isn't it?" (Jimmy Carr) "An escala...
Read more