main

The ISO 1998 c++ standard specifies that not explicitly using a return statement in the main is equivalent to use return 0 . But what if an implementation has a different standard "no error" code, for example -1 ? Why not use the standard macro EXIT_SUCCESS that would be replaced either by 0 or -1 or any other value depending on the implementation? C++ seems to force the semantic of the program, which is not the role of a language which should only describe how the program behaves. Moreover the situation is different for the "error" return value: only EXIT_FAILURE is a standard "error"

I am looking for a more technical explanation then the OS calls the function. Can anyone help me out or point me to a website or book? The .exe file (or equivalent on other platforms) contains an 'entry point' address. To a first approximation, the OS loads the relevant sections of the .EXE file into ram, and then jumps to the entry point. As others have said, this entry point will not be 'main', but will instead be a part of the runtime library - it will do things like initialising static objects, setting up the argc/argv parameters, setting up stdin/stdout/stderr, etc. When it's done all

I was looking through my OOP class documentation and I found this example: class Student { private String name; public int averageGrade; public Student(String n, int avg) { name = n; averageGrade = avg; } public static void main(String[] args) { Student s = new Student("John", 9); } } I find it confusing that they are instantiating an object from the main of the same class. Is this considered bad practice? Will the newly created object s have a main method? Thank you! There's nothing wrong at all with this. It's entirely normal. (Admittedly it would make more sense for a class with a main

I wrote a Scala class and defined the main() method in it. It compiled, but when I ran it, I got NoSuchMethodError:main . In all the scala examples, I have seen, the main method is defined in an object. In Java we define the main method in a class. Is it possible to define main() in a Scala class or do we always need an object for this? Apoorv Verma To answer your question, have a look on the following : I made a scala class, compiled and decompiled it, and what I got is interesting. class MyScalaClass{ def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = { println("Hello from main of class") } } Compiled

There is main application with logic and we extend app to Apple Watch. After adding target xCode creates 2 more applications: extension with code and watch kit application. Question: How code from extension can reuse logic of ready and already made main iOS app? How extension app can communicate with main App and send commands. To communicate to the containing iPhone app you can use (BOOL)openParentApplication:(NSDictionary *)userInfo reply:(void (^)(NSDictionary *replyInfo, NSError *error))reply In your WKInterfaceController From the Apple Docs Use this method to communicate with your

I am trying to get familiar with Kotlin to use in my android apps. So first I want to try out some simple kotlin examples, just to get familiar with syntax of kotlin. I made a class named Main.kt in my android project with just main method. fun main(args: Array<String>) { println("Hello World"); } Android studio shows me a kotlin icon to left of main method and when I click on this icon, It shows me below three option: 1) Run Mainkt 2) Debug Mainkt 3) Run Mainkt with coverage I chose first one but it throws me Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.vikalp.kotlin