why int main instead of void main?

Can someone explain to me why "void main" is wrong? Code like that can still be compiled (although it generates a warning) and run, and I have a textbook where every example has "void main" instead of "int main." Just curious. Thanks.

Well, actually you have to think about this from the perspective of the operating system, not the perspective of you writing code.

Regardless of how you prototype main(), the Operating System, arbitrarily expects the application to push an integer onto the stack at time of exit. You get away with 'void' here, because

a) it doesn't matter, the whole application heap will be disposed of momentarily, and
b) the application stub/wrapper that does the stack cleanup checks for an int to pull of the stack. If one isn't there, it returns a '0' (zero) to the O/S.

Primarily, you always prototype with 'int main(...)' for

a) good form, and
b) compatibility (some compilers require this)

enjoy.

ok dood, listen up.

Basicly the main() was created to return somesort of value.
So many programmer do int main(), and by the end of the main they put return(0); --> which is optional.
Just to keep the compiler happy.

Others do just main(), without any void or int before it, and no return(0); at the end of the main "function".

Now, void main() will compile, but it's not correct, because it's not what the people that created this language planed, so... just do
int main().

Or if you're really lazy as i am, just do: main().

Because let say you wrote void main() at the test, the teacher might take some points for it, but with MAIN() and INT MAIN() you can't miss!

void main(){
.
.
.
}

actually compiles exactly the same as

int main(){
.
.
.
return 0;
}

You only MUST use int main() if you want to notify the operating system of an abnormal exit (i.e. an error).

Actually, the ANSI standard says main returns an int so main should return an int irregardless of your OS/compiler.

http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/q11.12.html

void main(){
// prog
}
is wrong, for the same reason that

struct a { int a[10000]; } main( ) {
struct a res;
// prog
return res;
}
is wrong - it's not an int.

Oh sure, you just "get a warning" with both of them, but the latter one stands much more chance of blowing up in your face. It's only a matter of degree - is it a little wrong or a lot wrong?
And how many little wrongs do you have to make before your program stops working, behaving oddly or whatever?

> Others do just main(), without any void or int before it, and no return(0); at the end of the main "function".
Whist this correctly declares main, it results in a garbage value being returned to the operating system.

> Because let say you wrote void main() at the test, the teacher might take some points for it, but with MAIN() and INT MAIN() you can't miss!
Unbelievably, I've heard of one such teacher who took marks away for using int main - sheesh!

> Or if you're really lazy as i am, just do: main().
The ability to implicitly declare functions as returning int (as this does) is likely to disappear in future.

> I have a textbook where every example has "void main" instead of "int main."
There are far too many books like this

Salem, it's good to see you're still here. I'm kind of back from my little hiatus.

Quote:

---

Unbelievably, I've heard of one such teacher who took marks away for using int main - sheesh!

---

Somebody should blow that mother ****s head off with an assult rifle.

Or just make him write on the blackboard...

"I will never teach 'void main( )' again. I will instead teach 'int main( )."

...about half a million times.

Quzah.