The section $3.6.1/1 from the C++ Standard reads,
A program shall contain a global function called main, which is the designated start of the program.
Now consider this code,
int square(int i) { return i*i; } int user_main() { for ( int i = 0 ; i < 10 ; ++i ) std::cout << square(i) << endl; return 0; } int main_ret= user_main(); int main() { return main_ret; }
This sample code does what I intend it to do, i.e printing the square of integers from 0 to 9, before entering into the main()
function which is supposed to be the "start" of the program.
I also compiled it with -pedantic
option, GCC 4.5.0. It gives no error, not even warning!
So my question is,
Is this code really Standard conformant?
If it's standard conformant, then does it not invalidate what the Standard says? main()
is not start of this program! user_main()
executed before the main()
.
I understand that to initialize the global variable main_ret
, the use_main()
executes first but that is a different thing altogether; the point is that, it does invalidate the quoted statement $3.6.1/1 from the Standard, as main()
is NOT the start of the program; it is in fact the end of this program!
EDIT:
It boils down to the definition of the phrase "start of the program". So how exactly do you define it?
As far as the ISO C Standard is concerned, the entry point for a C program is always main (unless some implementation-defined feature is used to override it) for a hosted implementation.
The main function serves as the starting point for program execution. It usually controls program execution by directing the calls to other functions in the program. A program usually stops executing at the end of main, although it can terminate at other points in the program for a variety of reasons.
From C/C++ programming perspective, the program entry point is main() function.
The answer is yes. We can write program, that has no main() function. In many places, we have seen that the main() is the entry point of a program execution. Just from the programmers perspective this is true.
You are reading the sentence incorrectly.
A program shall contain a global function called main, which is the designated start of the program.
The standard is DEFINING the word "start" for the purposes of the remainder of the standard. It doesn't say that no code executes before main
is called. It says that the start of the program is considered to be at the function main
.
Your program is compliant. Your program hasn't "started" until main is started. The function is called before your program "starts" according to the definition of "start" in the standard, but that hardly matters. A LOT of code is executed before main
is ever called in every program, not just this example.
For the purposes of discussion, your function is executed prior to the 'start' of the program, and that is fully compliant with the standard.
No, C++ does a lot of things to "set the environment" prior to the call of main; however, main is the official start of the "user specified" part of the C++ program.
Some of the environment setup is not controllable (like the initial code to set up std::cout; however, some of the environment is controllable like static global blocks (for initializing static global variables). Note that since you don't have full control prior to main, you don't have full control on the order in which the static blocks get initialized.
After main, your code is conceptually "fully in control" of the program, in the sense that you can both specify the instructions to be performed and the order in which to perform them. Multi-threading can rearrange code execution order; but, you're still in control with C++ because you specified to have sections of code execute (possibly) out-of-order.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With