Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="The_Sage, post: 1462476"] That explains why you consider the question unanswered. Hence the reason I have never used it. Easy...you are lazy. Let's see...zero! That's because you don't know what you're doing. Then your point is moot, since you were wrong about void main() being illegal. And I don't see MS or IBM on your "partially conforming" list either. Still waiting for you to prove void main() is illegal according to the standard (and not by quoting it out of context either). But wait! You've already proven you weren't competent enough to refute where the standard states... 3.6.1 Main function paragraph 2: "It shall have a return type of type int -->BUT<-- otherwise its type is implementation-defined" That's pretty clear: A conforming compiler can use void main() as long as it makes int main() available...duh! So I'm not wasting my time with your stupidity any longer, since you aren't going to be honest enough to simply refute it with logic or facts (I wonder if you even know what those words mean?). The Sage ============================================================= My Home Page : [URL]http://members.cox.net/the.sage[/URL] "The men that American people admire most extravagantly are most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken ============================================================= [/QUOTE]