Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
on main
53 views
Skip to first unread message
asetof...@gmail.com
Apr 9, 2015, 8:13:04 AM4/9/15
to
I would like to know if
main(x){printf("%x",x);}
Is a valid C++ program
and what number it print...
main(x){printf("%x",x);}
Is a valid C++ program
and what number it print...
Victor Bazarov
Apr 9, 2015, 9:06:42 AM4/9/15
to
V
--
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
Juha Nieminen
Apr 9, 2015, 11:58:56 AM4/9/15
to
asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
> main(x){printf("%x",x);}
It might have been valid very ancient C (although I don't think it's
valid by any *standardization*, but many C compilers will accept it).
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
> main(x){printf("%x",x);}
It might have been valid very ancient C (although I don't think it's
valid by any *standardization*, but many C compilers will accept it).
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
asetof...@gmail.com
Apr 9, 2015, 12:00:56 PM4/9/15
to
main(x){printf("%x",x);}
Seems to me here would print 1
Seems to me here would print 1
Robert Wessel
Apr 9, 2015, 4:44:20 PM4/9/15
to
On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 09:00:46 -0700 (PDT), asetof...@gmail.com
wrote:
>main(x){printf("%x",x);}
>Seems to me here would print 1
Even if this worked as (apparently) expected, the number printed would
depend on how the program was invoked.
wrote:
>main(x){printf("%x",x);}
>Seems to me here would print 1
depend on how the program was invoked.
Vir Campestris
Apr 9, 2015, 4:54:15 PM4/9/15
to
On 09/04/2015 14:06, Victor Bazarov wrote:
> On 4/9/2015 8:12 AM, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I would like to know if
>> main(x){printf("%x",x);}
>> Is a valid C++ program
>> and what number it print...
>
> Not a valid C++ program.
>
Not valid - or just not compatible with any OS I ever came across?
> On 4/9/2015 8:12 AM, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I would like to know if
>> main(x){printf("%x",x);}
>> Is a valid C++ program
>> and what number it print...
>
> Not a valid C++ program.
>
(Win and *n?x seem to require argc and argv...)
Andy
Geoff
Apr 9, 2015, 5:22:50 PM4/9/15
to
>main(x){printf("%x",x);}
>Seems to me here would print 1
Why?
>Seems to me here would print 1
Martin Shobe
Apr 9, 2015, 7:38:00 PM4/9/15
to
prototype for printf, that need to be fixed before we talk about the
non-standard prototype for main.
Martin Shobe
Lőrinczy Zsigmond
Apr 10, 2015, 12:30:08 AM4/10/15
to
Scott Lurndal
Apr 10, 2015, 9:50:28 AM4/10/15
to
only use argc, argv, and some use envp as well. There is
nothing illegal or undefined about defining main to consume
only the argc parameter; the remaining parameters passed by
the exec call will be ignored and unavailable to the app
(although getenv()/setenv()/putenv() will access the environment
directly). auxv, which is passed from the kernel,
is often consumed by the run-time-linker/loader and may or may
not be provided to the application depending on the OS.
As otherwise pointed out, the value of the 'argc' parameter
depends on how the main function was invoked.
scott
Robert Wessel
Apr 10, 2015, 2:34:36 PM4/10/15
to
On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 13:50:18 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>Vir Campestris <vir.cam...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>On 09/04/2015 14:06, Victor Bazarov wrote:
>>> On 4/9/2015 8:12 AM, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> I would like to know if
>>>> main(x){printf("%x",x);}
>>>> Is a valid C++ program
>>>> and what number it print...
>>>
>>> Not a valid C++ program.
>>>
>>Not valid - or just not compatible with any OS I ever came across?
>>
>>(Win and *n?x seem to require argc and argv...)
>>
>
> *n?x provides argc, argv, envp and auxv. Most programs
>only use argc, argv, and some use envp as well. There is
>nothing illegal or undefined about defining main to consume
>only the argc parameter; the remaining parameters passed by
>the exec call will be ignored and unavailable to the app
>(although getenv()/setenv()/putenv() will access the environment
>directly). auxv, which is passed from the kernel,
>is often consumed by the run-time-linker/loader and may or may
>not be provided to the application depending on the OS.
There's' nothing preventing an implementation from providing an
extension so that a form of main() other than the two specified in the
standard are supported, but the form being proposed here is undefined
per the standard. Yes, with some of the common calling conventions
used by C implementations it would work naturally, but that is
certainly not required.
wrote:
>Vir Campestris <vir.cam...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>On 09/04/2015 14:06, Victor Bazarov wrote:
>>> On 4/9/2015 8:12 AM, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> I would like to know if
>>>> main(x){printf("%x",x);}
>>>> Is a valid C++ program
>>>> and what number it print...
>>>
>>> Not a valid C++ program.
>>>
>>Not valid - or just not compatible with any OS I ever came across?
>>
>>(Win and *n?x seem to require argc and argv...)
>>
>
> *n?x provides argc, argv, envp and auxv. Most programs
>only use argc, argv, and some use envp as well. There is
>nothing illegal or undefined about defining main to consume
>only the argc parameter; the remaining parameters passed by
>the exec call will be ignored and unavailable to the app
>(although getenv()/setenv()/putenv() will access the environment
>directly). auxv, which is passed from the kernel,
>is often consumed by the run-time-linker/loader and may or may
>not be provided to the application depending on the OS.
extension so that a form of main() other than the two specified in the
standard are supported, but the form being proposed here is undefined
per the standard. Yes, with some of the common calling conventions
used by C implementations it would work naturally, but that is
certainly not required.
0 new messages