It was thus said that the Great Alfred M. Szmidt once stated:
> It was thus said that the Great Noel Chiappa via cctalk once stated:
> > > From: Alfred M. Szmidt
> >
> > > No even the following program:
> > > int main (void) { return 0; }
> > > is guaranteed to work
> >
> > I'm missing something: why not?
>
> Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too. I mean, pedantically, it
> should be:
>
>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }
>
> Pedantically, it does not matter -- a return from main is equivalent
> to an exit(), and exit(0) is sensibly defined, and EXIT_SUCCESS can
> also be different from 0 (even though I don't think such a platform
> exists).
>
> Similiarly for EXIT_FAILURE ...
There's this
(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8867871/should-i-return-exit-success-or-0-from-main/8868139#8868139):
Somebody asked about OpenVMS. I haven't used it in a long time, but
as I recall odd status values generally denote success while even
values denote failure. The C implementation maps 0 to 1, so that
return 0; indicates successful termination. Other values are passed
unchanged, so return 1; also indicates successful termination.
EXIT_FAILURE would have a non-zero even value.
And certainly VMS is on topic for this list.
-spc (So ... pedantically speaking, who's correct?)
The standard, from 7.20.4.3:
Finally, control is returned to the host environment. If the value
of status is zero or EXIT_SUCCESS, an implementation-defined form of
the status successful termination is returned. If the value of
status is EXIT_FAILURE, an implementation-defined form of the status
unsuccessful termination is returned. Otherwise the status returned
is implementation-defined.
