Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 708015
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 14, 20262026-05-14T04:20:34+00:00 2026-05-14T04:20:34+00:00

I know that the C++ standard says that return 0 is inserted at the

  • 0

I know that the C++ standard says that return 0 is inserted at the end of main() if no return statement is given; however, I often see recently-written, standard-conforming C++ code that explicitly returns 0 at the end of main(). For what reasons would somebody want to explicitly return 0 if it’s automatically done by the compiler?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-14T04:20:35+00:00Added an answer on May 14, 2026 at 4:20 am

    Because it just looks weird to not “return” something from a function having a non-void return type (even if the standard says it’s not strictly necessary).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I know that the C++ standard says (sec 9.4.2 paragraph 4) that a static
I know that in standard SQL you can do this: update top (100) table1
So we know that the standard doesn't force pointer sizes to be equal. (
Can anyone confirm what the standard says about the default return type of vararg
I know __proto__ is deprecated (or not part of the standard) and all that
I need to validate shipping container numbers. There is an industry standard that says
I know that dip is standard for determining sizes on android. So when the
i know that there is some rules and standards in css handling but i
I know that there are so many standards for writing code. And some policy
I want to know that is there any standards for defining gestures using Kinect

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.