The_Sage & void main()

[Kwan Ting]

The_Sage, I see you've gotten yourself a twin asking for program in
comp.lang.c++ .

http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&th=45cd1b289c71c33c&rnum=1

If you the oh so mighty programmer that you pretend to be, why don't you
just write some? (And oh, void main is still not allow by the C++ standard.)

Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard in an attempt to pretend
you're right, I'll quote the standard to once and for all destory all your
arguements.

C++ standard 3.6.1 Main function
Paragraph 5
"A return statement in main has the effect of leaving the main function
(destroying any objects with automatic storage duration) and calling exit
with the return value as the argument. If control reaches the end of main
without encountering a return statement, the effect is that of executing
return 0;"

Now, not even an idiot like you can argue with what it says here. Either an
return value have been specificed, or the main function return 0 by default.
Could you please tell everyone in your (imaginary) infinte wisdom how main
can be of type void if it return a value?
(Oh btw, that paragraph from the standard is only 3 paragraphs down (on the
same page) from what you quoted, if only you had learn how to read
properly.....)

Kwan Ting
--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine

[WW]

Re: The_Sage & void main()

Kwan Ting wrote:
[SNIP][color=blue]
> Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard in an attempt to
> pretend you're right, I'll quote the standard to once and for
> all destory all your arguements.[/color]
[SNIP]

He doesn't even know what the standard is. I quoted it, then he picked out
one sentence and started to misinterpret it.

--
WW aka Attila

[Keroppi]

Re: The_Sage & void main()


"WW" wrote[color=blue]
>
> He doesn't even know what the standard is. I quoted it, then he picked[/color]
out[color=blue]
> one sentence and started to misinterpret it.
>
> --
> WW aka Attila
>[/color]

Ah yes, one of his many personailities know what the standard is, while
another doesn't...
Nice to see how someone can understand something only if it suits the
person.... :D

Kwan Ting
--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine

[Johannes Kroll]

Re: The_Sage & void main()

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:53:32 +0100
"Kwan Ting" <me@here.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> The_Sage, I see you've gotten yourself a twin asking for program in
> comp.lang.c++ .
> http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl...c71c33c&rnum=1[/color]

ROFLMAO :)

[WW]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

Johannes Kroll wrote:[color=blue]
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:53:32 +0100
> "Kwan Ting" <me@here.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> The_Sage, I see you've gotten yourself a twin asking for program in
>> comp.lang.c++ .
>>[/color][/color]
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl...c71c33c&rnum=1[color=blue]
>
> ROFLMAO :)[/color]

Do you like it? I wrote it. ;-) Really. (Me proud :-) )

--
WW aka Attila

[Johannes Kroll]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:09:02 +0300
"WW" <wolof@freemail .hu> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Johannes Kroll wrote:[color=green]
> > On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:53:32 +0100
> > "Kwan Ting" <me@here.com> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> The_Sage, I see you've gotten yourself a twin asking for program in
> >> comp.lang.c++ .
> >>[/color][/color]
> http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl...c71c33c&rnum=1[color=green]
> >
> > ROFLMAO :)[/color]
>
> Do you like it? I wrote it. ;-) Really. (Me proud :-) )[/color]

Even better than the real thing. Almost - no one beats The Sage. :)

[color=blue]
> --
> WW aka Attila
>
>[/color]

[Kwan Ting]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

"WW" <wolof@freemail .hu> wrote in message
news:bksj3a$n27 $1@phys-news1.kolumbus. fi...[color=blue]
> Johannes Kroll wrote:[color=green]
> > On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:53:32 +0100
> > "Kwan Ting" <me@here.com> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> The_Sage, I see you've gotten yourself a twin asking for program in
> >> comp.lang.c++ .
> >>[/color][/color]
>[/color]
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl...c71c33c&rnum=1[color=blue][color=green]
> >
> > ROFLMAO :)[/color]
>
> Do you like it? I wrote it. ;-) Really. (Me proud :-) )
>
> --
> WW aka Attila
>[/color]

I'm proud of you WW :-)
--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine

[Randall Hyde]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()


"WW" <wolof@freemail .hu> wrote in message news:bks9ij$n0t $1@phys-news1.kolumbus. fi...[color=blue]
> Kwan Ting wrote:
> [SNIP][color=green]
> > Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard in an attempt to
> > pretend you're right, I'll quote the standard to once and for
> > all destory all your arguements.[/color]
> [SNIP]
>
> He doesn't even know what the standard is. I quoted it, then he picked out
> one sentence and started to misinterpret it.[/color]

That's okay, I can beat that.
I posted some assembly code with some "almost equivalent" C code
in the comments and he accused me of posting C code, not assembly :-)

I'm sure, however, that he'll claim he ran my assembly code through
the Borland, Microsoft, and IBM compilers and all three accepted
the code just fine :-)
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

[The_Sage]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

>Reply to article by: "Kwan Ting" <me@here.com>[color=blue]
>Date written: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:53:32 +0100
>MsgID:<wlhcb.6 53$_N1.597165@n ewsfep1-win.server.ntli .net>[/color]
[color=blue]
>If you the oh so mighty programmer that you pretend to be, why don't you
>just write some? (And oh, void main is still not allow by the C++ standard.)[/color]

I have, now it is your turn.
[color=blue]
>Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard[/color]

I didn't try, I actually did quote the standard.
[color=blue]
>in an attempt to pretend
>you're right, I'll quote the standard to once and for all destory all your
>arguements.[/color]

Oh, I'm so scared...
[color=blue]
>C++ standard 3.6.1 Main function
>Paragraph 5
>"A return statement in main has the effect of leaving the main function
>(destroying any objects with automatic storage duration) and calling exit
>with the return value as the argument. If control reaches the end of main
>without encountering a return statement, the effect is that of executing
> return 0;"[/color]

Nothing there says anything about not being able to use void main() and you
haven't offered any explainantion why they would want to contradict themselves
by stating earlier that "other implementations " of main() were allowed. In
addition to that, you also have not offered any explanation of why would IBM,
MS, and Borland agree with my interpretation and not yours? Once again, you are
just another example of an illiterate asshole who doesn't have a clue. You are
going to need more than your big mouth and your little brain if you want to
offer an intelligent argument that will stand up to the facts. Now go away with
your tail tucked between your legs, and don't come back until you get a clue.

The Sage

=============== =============== =============== =============== =
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"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
=============== =============== =============== =============== =

[Attila Feher]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

The_Sage wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
>> Reply to article by: "Kwan Ting" <me@here.com>
>> Date written: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:53:32 +0100
>> MsgID:<wlhcb.65 3$_N1.597165@ne wsfep1-win.server.ntli .net>[/color]
>[color=green]
>> If you the oh so mighty programmer that you pretend to be, why
>> don't you just write some? (And oh, void main is still not allow by
>> the C++ standard.)[/color]
>
> I have, now it is your turn.[/color]

You did not. Now it is your turn.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard[/color]
>
> I didn't try, I actually did quote the standard.[/color]

Now. I did. You then copied it from my post, carefully leaving out those
parts, which you did not understand so you could not try to turn them inside
out to make them to look to support your braindead ideas. Like the part
which says that the return value of main is passed to the exit function
(taking an int argument).
[color=blue][color=green]
>> in an attempt to pretend
>> you're right, I'll quote the standard to once and for all destory
>> all your arguements.[/color]
>
> Oh, I'm so scared...[/color]

No. You are not. You don't have the brains for it.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> C++ standard 3.6.1 Main function
>> Paragraph 5
>> "A return statement in main has the effect of leaving the main
>> function (destroying any objects with automatic storage duration)
>> and calling exit with the return value as the argument. If control
>> reaches the end of main without encountering a return statement, the
>> effect is that of executing return 0;"[/color]
>
> Nothing there says anything about not being able to use void main()[/color]

Except that a void main cannot return 0.
[color=blue]
> and you haven't offered any explainantion why they would want to
> contradict themselves by stating earlier that "other implementations "
> of main() were allowed.[/color]

Because they also did state there that all of those "other implementations "
*must* have an int return value.
[color=blue]
> In addition to that, you also have not
> offered any explanation of why would IBM, MS, and Borland agree with
> my interpretation and not yours?[/color]

None of them does. The C++ liaison of Microsoft just have told you, that
accepting void main is a non-standard, standards conforming extension in
their compilers.
[color=blue]
> Once again, you are just another
> example of an illiterate asshole[/color]

One more sentence like this and I will make your NSP cut you off the
internet. I promise. Believe me I know the way.
[color=blue]
> who doesn't have a clue.[/color]

Ah. Are you talking about yourself?
[color=blue]
> You are
> going to need more than your big mouth and your little brain if you
> want to offer an intelligent argument that will stand up to the
> facts. Now go away with your tail tucked between your legs, and don't
> come back until you get a clue.[/color]

You need urgent medical attention. The Sage. If you want war you will get
war. If you don't stop your nonsense here and you keep calling names I
will, I repeat, I will get your service provider get you off the internet.

--
Attila aka WW

[Karl Heinz Buchegger]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()



The_Sage wrote:[color=blue]
>
> offer an intelligent argument that will stand up to the facts. Now go away with
> your tail tucked between your legs, and don't come back until you get a clue.[/color]

You are not in the position to tell anybody to 'go away'.
At least not in comp.lang.c++

But keep up the good work. I appriciate the way you
make a fool out of yourself.

--
Karl Heinz Buchegger
kbuchegg@gascad .at

[Noah Roberts]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

Attila Feher wrote:[color=blue]
> The_Sage wrote:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>Reply to article by: "Kwan Ting" <me@here.com>
>>>Date written: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:53:32 +0100
>>>MsgID:<wlhcb .653$_N1.597165 @newsfep1-win.server.ntli .net>[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>>>If you the oh so mighty programmer that you pretend to be, why
>>>don't you just write some? (And oh, void main is still not allow by
>>>the C++ standard.)[/color]
>>
>>I have, now it is your turn.[/color]
>
>
> You did not.[/color]

[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard[/color]
>>
>>I didn't try, I actually did quote the standard.[/color]
>
>
> Now. I did.[color=green]
>>Oh, I'm so scared...[/color]
>
>
> No. You are not.[color=green]
>>Once again, you are just another
>>example of an illiterate asshole[/color]
>
>
> One more sentence like this and I will make your NSP cut you off the
> internet. I promise. Believe me I know the way.
>
>[color=green]
>>who doesn't have a clue.[/color]
>
>
> Ah. Are you talking about yourself?
>
>[/color]
Now go away with your tail tucked between your legs, and don't[color=blue][color=green]
>>come back until you get a clue.[/color]
>
>
> You need urgent medical attention. The Sage. If you want war you will get
> war. If you don't stop your nonsense here and you keep calling names I
> will, I repeat, I will get your service provider get you off the internet.[/color]


I don't think I could add anything to a thread that has reached such an
epitome of human intelegence. I don't think I have the kind of maturity
level necissary.

NR

[WW]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

Noah Roberts wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
>> You need urgent medical attention. The Sage. If you want war you
>> will get war. If you don't stop your nonsense here and you keep
>> calling names I will, I repeat, I will get your service provider get
>> you off the internet.[/color]
>
> I don't think I could add anything to a thread that has reached such
> an epitome of human intelegence. I don't think I have the kind of
> maturity level necissary.[/color]

Hey! Don't destroy my game!

--
WW aka Attila

[The_Sage]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

>Reply to article by: Noah Roberts <nroberts@donte mailme.com>[color=blue]
>Date written: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 08:23:30 -0700
>MsgID:<3F73087 2.6080400@donte mailme.com>[/color]
[color=blue]
>I don't think I could add anything to a thread that has reached such an
>epitome of human intelegence. I don't think I have the kind of maturity
>level necissary.[/color]

You just proved yourself wrong.

The Sage

=============== =============== =============== =============== =
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"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
=============== =============== =============== =============== =

[The_Sage]

Re: The_Sage &amp; void main()

>Reply to article by: "Attila Feher" <attila.feher@l mf.ericsson.se>[color=blue]
>Date written: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:27:22 +0300
>MsgID:<bku8rs$ scm$1@newstree. wise.edt.ericss on.se>[/color]
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>If you the oh so mighty programmer that you pretend to be, why
>>>don't you just write some? (And oh, void main is still not allow by
>>>the C++ standard.)[/color][/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> I have, now it is your turn.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>You did not. Now it is your turn.[/color]

That is childish.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard[/color][/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>>I didn't try, I actually did quote the standard.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>Now. I did. You then copied it from my post[/color]

The only place a quote from a standard could come from is from you? I don't
think so. And a quote is a quote is a quote and the quote says that "other types
may be implemented-defined". Can't get any clearer than that.

Grow up, please.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>in an attempt to pretend
>>>you're right, I'll quote the standard to once and for all destory
>>>all your arguements.[/color][/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>>Oh, I'm so scared...[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>No. You are not. You don't have the brains for it.[/color]

Oh, what a wondeful comeback. I'm still so scared. You are just too powerful for
us. Please don't hurt me anymore with your innuendo and name calling and blind
faith denial and dodge and evade tactics.

Again, grow up.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> C++ standard 3.6.1 Main function
>>> Paragraph 5
>>> "A return statement in main has the effect of leaving the main
>>> function (destroying any objects with automatic storage duration)
>>> and calling exit with the return value as the argument. If control
>>> reaches the end of main without encountering a return statement, the
>>> effect is that of executing return 0;"[/color][/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Nothing there says anything about not being able to use void main()[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>Except that a void main cannot return 0.[/color]

It does not say "void main cannot return 0". That is your interpretation and
only your interpretation. IBM, MS, and Borland all disagree with you but agree
with me. They all use void main(). Everyone who has ever used those compilers
knows that, so why don't you use one of those compilers and see what you've been
missing?

Here, let me help you embarrass yourself...

http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/FGA/legality-of-void-main.html

It's simple: You do not know what you are talking about. Come back when you can
be more civil and actually have some facts instead of childish banter.

The Sage

=============== =============== =============== =============== =
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"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
=============== =============== =============== =============== =