From 2488622406228612039 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,314ebdf2ff957e27 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-11 22:10:20 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: jackklein@spamcop.net (Jack Klein) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Why int main()? Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 05:10:19 +0000 (UTC) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Lines: 42 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: <9k6f9vkh1959gdaln74lutrdbv9kr9rq0c@4ax.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1050124220 2280 10.0.0.1 (12 Apr 2003 05:10:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 05:10:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.oz.au ([128.250.1.22]) by news.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 194DHO-0000ad-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Sat, 12 Apr 2003 05:10:18 +0000 X-Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU id PAA11601; Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:10:09 +1000 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560 X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 04:51:13 GMT X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.0 required=5.0 tests=NOSPAM_INC,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, SIGNATURE_SHORT_DENSE,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.41 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:18744 On Fri, 11 Apr 2003 22:54:02 +0000 (UTC), jdennett@acm.org (James Dennett) wrote in comp.std.c++: > Francis Glassborow wrote: > > In article , Huw Ford > > writes > > > >> A lot of compilers will accept "void main()" so why must main return > >> an int? > > > > > > Because Standards are about portability. It is easy for a system to > > ignore a return value when it does not need one, it is much harder to > > create one where it is needed and none has been provided. > > And yet there's a wart in C++ because main is the _only_ > function returning int where we do not have to providfe a > return value when the function exits, as a default value > is indeed provided. In the opinion of many, myself included, that was a mistake. It appears to me to be a sop to those who whined about having to type a "return 0;". At that it was better than standardizing "void main()", and of course there might be other reasons I am not aware of. Sadly, the C standard has done this as well, with even less justification, as main() is not unique in C the way it is in C++. -- Jack Klein Home: http://JK-Technology.Com FAQs for comp.lang.c http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++ ftp://snurse-l.org/pub/acllc-c++/faq --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]