Is it fine to write “void main()” or “main()” in C/C++?

The definition

void main() { /* ... */ }

is not and never has been C++, nor has it even been C. See the ISO C++ standard 3.6.1[2] or the ISO C standard 5.1.2.2.1. A conforming implementation accepts

int main() { /* ... */ }

and



int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { /* ... */ }

A conforming implementation may provide more versions of main(), but they must all have return type int. The int returned by main() is a way for a program to return a value to “the system” that invokes it. On systems that doesn’t provide such a facility the return value is ignored, but that doesn’t make “void main()” legal C++ or legal C. Even if your compiler accepts “void main()” avoid it, or risk being considered ignorant by C and C++ programmers.
In C++, main() need not contain an explicit return statement. In that case, the value returned is 0, meaning successful execution.
For example:

#include <iostream>
int main()
{
    std::cout << "This program returns the integer value 0\n";
}

Note also that neither ISO C++ nor C99 allows you to leave the type out of a declaration. That is, in contrast to C89 and ARM C++ ,”int” is not assumed where a type is missing in a declaration. Consequently:

#include <iostream>
  
main() { /* ... */ }

is an error because the return type of main() is missing.

Source: http://www.stroustrup.com/bs_faq2.html#void-main



To summarize above, it is never a good idea to use “void main()” or just “main()” as it doesn’t confirm standards. It may be allowed by some compilers though.

Please write comments if you find anything incorrect, or you want to share more information about the topic discussed above



My Personal Notes arrow_drop_up

Article Tags :
Practice Tags :



5


Please write to us at contribute@geeksforgeeks.org to report any issue with the above content.