MISRA C++:2023 Rule 13.3.4

#include <iostream>

class Base
{
public:
    void func() {}
    int func1() {}
    virtual void virtualFunc() {}
};

class Derived : public Base
{
public:
    void func2() {}
    int func3() {}
};

void checkPtr(void (Derived::*funcPtr)(), int (Derived::*funcPtr1)())
{

    if (funcPtr != nullptr)
    {
        std::cout << "Pointer is valid\n";
    }
    if (funcPtr1 != nullptr)
    {
        std::cout << "Pointer is valid\n";
    }
    if (funcPtr1 == &Derived::func3)
    {
        std::cout << "Pointer matches Derived::func2\n";
    }
    if (funcPtr == &Derived::func2)   // Noncompliant
    {
        std::cout << "Pointer matches Derived::func2\n";
    }
}

In this example, Polyspace reports a violation on the comparison funcPtr == &Derived::func2 because funcPtr is a potentially virtual pointer, making the result of the comparison unspecified.

funcPtr is a void pointer the member functions of the class Derived, and the pointer might point to the virtual member function virtualFunc with the same type as funcPtr, and which the class Derived inherits from the class Base.

The other pointer comparisons are all compliant because they are comparisons to nullptr, or in the case of funcPtr1 == &Derived::func3, there are no virtual member function in the class Derived that match the type of funcPtr1, so the pointer is not potentially virtual.