int (&main)() = f;

[LB]

int f()
{
    return 0;
}

int (&main)() = f;

It compiles fine, but it crashes. Why does it even compile?

[Cubbi]

Doesn't compile link for me:

$ xlC -o test test.cc
ld: 0711-317 ERROR: Undefined symbol: .main

[pogrady]

try this instead:

int (*main)() = f;

[Duthomhas]

LOL! How did you come across that one?


It is valid syntactically, but it is invalid because main() is a special function, which cannot be (portably) treated any differently than the standard way. Your compiler might just be too stupid to realize that compiling it produces gibberish object code (due, again, to main()'s special requirements).

(Compiles for GCC 4.3. And crashes.)

[guestgulkan]

Will compile and run and crash in GCC.
fails to link in MSVC2008.

[vlad from moscow]

@Cubbi
Doesn't compile link for me:

@guestgulkan
fails to link in MSVC2008.

Try the following:)

extern "C"
{

int f()
{
	return 0;
}

int ( &main )() = f;

}

[Duthomhas]

That doesn't fix the underlying problem.

(Compiles for GCC 4.6.2, and still crashes.)

[vlad from moscow]

@Duoas
That doesn't fix the underlying problem.

This fixes the linker message.:)

[Duthomhas]

LOL, true. I still wanna know where LB got this from.

[LB]

I thought of it myself randomly, where would I have got it from? XD

Also, language design choice debate: should main be a function or just the one and only section of code that gets executed?

[Duthomhas]

Why not both?


SUB Hello
  PRINT "Hello world!"
END SUB

Hello

:-]

[IWishIKnew]

this is like minecraft logic for C++: "no int main()? Fk logic!" ROFL

[LB]

Assuming Fk is Femto-kilowatts, you really have Fk'd logic.

[Duthomhas]

I know! I first thought he was talking about Forward Kinematics, but he can't be, since you can't start a transformation without the first vector...