void

This is a follow-up up of this question. In the comments and in the answer it is said more than once that void{} is neither a valid type-id nor a valid expression . That was fine, it made sense and that was all. Then I came through [7.1.7.4.1/2] ( placeholder type deduction ) of the working draft. There it is said that: [...] - for a non-discarded return statement that occurs in a function declared with a return type that contains a placeholder type, T is the declared return type and e is the operand of the return statement. If the return statement has no operand, then e is void{} ; [...] So,

I am curious if there is a legitimate reason as to why C# does not support calling a void method as part of the return statement when the calling method's return type is also void. public void MethodA() { return; } public void MethodB() { return MethodA(); } So we would normally see this: public void MethodMeh() { if (expression) { MethodA(); return; } // Do more stuff } ... when we could be using this instead: public void MethodAwesome() { if (expression) return MethodA(); // Do more stuff } Is this a language limitation due to how C# handles void? Because it's simply the way the language is

This question already has an answer here: A get() like method for checking for Python attributes 3 answers I have an object myobject , which might return None . If it returns None , it won't return an attribute id : a = myobject.id So when myobject is None , the stament above results in a AttributeError : AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'id' If myobject is None, then I want a to be equal to None . How do I avoid this exception in one line statement, such as: a = default(myobject.id, None) Inbar Rose You should use the getattr wrapper instead of directly retrieving the value

I'm trying to determine whether a C++ function can be declared in such a way that the return value cannot be ignored (ideally detected at compile time). I tried to declare a class with a private (or in C++11, delete d) operator void() to try to catch the implicit conversion to void when a return value is unused. Here's an example program: class Unignorable { operator void(); }; Unignorable foo() { return Unignorable(); } int main() { foo(); return 0; } Unfortunately, my compiler (clang-703.0.31) says: test.cpp:2:5: warning: conversion function converting 'Unignorable' to 'void' will never be

I'm getting this error inside an extended asynctask, but i'm really sure that Object[] IS a Void[]. This is my custom AsyncTask: public abstract class RepeatableAsyncTask<A, B, C> extends AsyncTask<A, B, C> { private static final String TAG = "RepeatableAsyncTask"; public static final int DEFAULT_MAX_RETRY = 5; private int mMaxRetries = DEFAULT_MAX_RETRY; private Exception mException = null; /** * Default constructor */ public RepeatableAsyncTask() { super(); } /** * Constructs an AsyncTask that will repeate itself for max Retries * @param retries Max Retries. */ public RepeatableAsyncTask(int

Is it possible to have an array of multiple types by using malloc ? EDIT: Currently I have: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #define int(x) *((int *) x) int main() { void *a[10]; a[0] = malloc(sizeof(int)); int(a[0]) = 4; char *b = "yola."; a[1] = malloc(strlen(b)*sizeof(char)); a[1] = b; printf("%d\n", int(a[0])); printf("%s\n", a[1]); } But it's messy. Other ways? EDIT: Cleaned it up a bit. You can't have an array of different types, exactly. But you can achieve a similar effect (for some purposes at least) in a number of different ways. If you just want a few