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

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • 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 5940637
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 22, 20262026-05-22T15:59:45+00:00 2026-05-22T15:59:45+00:00

The given code compiles in C but fails in C++. int main() { const

  • 0

The given code compiles in C but fails in C++.

int main()
{
   const int x; /* uninitialized const compiles in C but fails in C++*/
}

What is the rationale and the reason behind the change from C to C++?

  • 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
    2026-05-22T15:59:45+00:00Added an answer on May 22, 2026 at 3:59 pm

    See the spec, in the compatibility appendix C.1.6:

    7.1.6 [see also 3.5]

    Change: const objects must be initialized in C++ but can be left uninitialized in C

    Rationale: A const object cannot be assigned to so it must be initialized to hold a useful value.

    Effect on original feature: Deletion of semantically well-defined feature.

    Difficulty of converting: Semantic transformation.

    How widely used: Seldom.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

Simple sum of digits code. It compiles but when executed, the last cout gives
Given the code from the Complex Form part III how would you go about
Given this code: int min = 0; Expression<Func<List<IUser>, bool>> ulContainsJohn = (l => l.Where(u
I have written some code which compiles fine under linux but on Solaris I
The code below compiles, but has different behavior for the char type than for
Given this Scala code: object test { def byval(a: Int) = println(Int) def byval(a:
I was given this source code and asked to compile it: it fails with
when the following code is compiled it goes into an infinite loop: int main()
The following code snippet compiles just fine on Mac OS X with gcc, but
The compiler, given the following code, tells me Use of unassigned local variable 'x'.

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.