DevC++ no longer compiling, [Linker error]

[Tropod]

EDIT: Solution found: Tools > Compiler Options > Settings > Linker > Do not use standard system startup files or libraries. End edit.


hi,
Just wondering if there's some thing (i.e setting?) that could be changed to fix this issue before I decide to completely reinstall DevC++;

For whatever reason, I can now no longer compile even the most basic code without getting various [Linker error] undefined reference etc errors when trying to compile a single source file, though I previously could without issue. However, creating a project and compiling the exact same code (same location etc), everything compiles and runs fine.

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

int main()
{}

Errors;

[Warning] cannot find entry symbol _mainCRTStartup; defaulting to 00401000 
\Temp\ccGAbaaa.o(.text+0x17) In function `ZSt17__verify_groupingPKcjRKSs': 
[Linker error] undefined reference to `std::string::size() const' 
\Temp\ccGAbaaa.o(.text+0x135) In function `main':

And various other, similar, errors.

Please note: I'm only a beginner , but as I said, if I use this exact same code with a project it works fine. It's as if I've done something to DevC++ to cause this, but I can't for the life of me see how/where I would/could of done this.
I'm using DevC++ v4.9.9.2.

Please let me know if any other info may help.

[tabstop]

Not sure what option you changed, but it's probably in Tools->Compiler Options. You surely shouldn't have anything under Linker Commands.

[Tropod]

Well I did make some additions to the linker command for some OpenGL tutorials I was going through, but I've since (tried &) removed all the linker commands but to no avail.


Just as I was typing this, I got it working.....
Tools > Compiler Options > Settings > Linker > Do not use standard system startup files or libraries.
ggrr I do remember changing that now lol, trying to get something else to work earlier haha.


Thanks for your input!!

[execute]

Don't forget int main () , should return 0; or an int.

[laserlight]

Don't forget int main () , should return 0; or an int.

The global main function returns 0 if control reaches the end of it without encountering a return statement.

[execute]

Most compilers still require you to have a return statement in a non-void function.

[laserlight]

Most compilers still require you to have a return statement in a non-void function.

They should, but the global main function is an exception.

[phantomotap]

Most compilers still require you to have a return statement in a non-void function.

This is true of any good compiler for all normal functions, but 'main' is treated special in this case as required by the standard.

Soma

[EVOEx]

They should, but the global main function is an exception.

True, although the very few times I've used VC++ it did complain about no return statement. I feel lucky I seldomly have to use it, though...

[laserlight]

True, although the very few times I've used VC++ it did complain about no return statement. I feel lucky I seldomly have to use it, though...

You probably are talking about the pre-standard MSVC6, or maybe MSVC7.

[brewbuck]

EDIT: Solution found: Tools > Compiler Options > Settings > Linker > Do not use standard system startup files or libraries. End edit.

That's a pretty weird "fix." I'm not sure you've addressed the root cause, here.

[tabstop]

That's a pretty weird "fix." I'm not sure you've addressed the root cause, here.

That was the problem. The fix is to not do that.

[execute]

My point was, some even complain about main(). And why are we even debating or talking about this? This is like arguing about what color car is better.

[laserlight]

My point was, some even complain about main(). And why are we even debating or talking about this? This is like arguing about what color car is better.

You are right to say that this is like arguing about what colour car is better: the choice of whether to have an explicit return statement in the global main function is user preference. We are talking about this because you complained about the "missing" return statement.

[execute]

I said you need it, for certain IDEs, maybe those IDEs implemented it wrong, but it doesn't matter. And I didn't complain about it.