From:	khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu (Mumit Khan)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: STL
Date:	17 May 1999 15:48:21 GMT
Organization:	Center for X-ray Lithography, UW-Madison
Lines:	17
Message-ID:	<7hpdo5$m6k$1@news.doit.wisc.edu>
References:	<373B3FD7 DOT 7D692AD2 AT alphalink DOT com DOT au> <373E8A8C DOT 87D93E54 AT earthlink DOT net> <37412752 DOT 914433 AT noticias DOT iies DOT es>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	modi.xraylith.wisc.edu
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

In article <37412752 DOT 914433 AT noticias DOT iies DOT es>,
Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia <XXguille AT XXiies DOT XXes> wrote:
>
>Note that while this is true for C, it is not for C++; in which you
>can perfectly define main() as returning void, according to the ISO
>standard.
>

Wrong. Please check the standard (cf: 3.6.1) before making such 
assertions.

The only change is that if you drop off main without an explicit return,
there's an implict ``return 0''.

Regards,
Mumit

- Raw text -