From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Read Me Third: A Short FAQ List Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 19:26:38 +0200 Organization: NetVision Israel Lines: 10 Message-ID: References: <0A02668AA6DAF2EA DOT B7324B0997533B2E DOT A43653802EA26ABD AT lp DOT airnews DOT net> <7oUXONJSazygooCyeWwSD8msc766 AT 4ax DOT com> <38193387 DOT 616294 AT news DOT bigpond DOT com> NNTP-Posting-Host: is.elta.co.il Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: news.netvision.net.il 941131517 7999 199.203.121.2 (28 Oct 1999 17:25:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse AT netvision DOT net DOT il NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Oct 1999 17:25:17 GMT X-Sender: eliz AT is In-Reply-To: <38193387.616294@news.bigpond.com> To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Chris Mears wrote: > I haven't read the C++ standard in a while, but I have a funny feeling > there was a provision for main() not to have a return statement. If > it was omitted, it implicitly returned 0. Can anyone confirm/shoot me > down? You are right, the C++ Standard does say that. And GCC indeed behaves like this.