Skip to main content

return void

I thought it would be interesting to discuss a subtle C/C++ interview question I learned recently. Question is deceptively simple: "Can you write a return statement in a function that returns void?" The answer is "Yes! You can return void!" The following program seems to be a valid C/C++ program.

static void foo (void) { }
static void bar (void) {
return foo(); // Note this return statement.
}
int main (void) {
bar();
return 0;
}

I tested it using gcc4 and VS9. With -ansi and -pedantic compiler options for gcc, it throws just a warning pointing at line #5.

return_void.c:5: warning: return with a value, in function returning void

Although use of such a feature is not clear in a C program, it is particularly useful while using templates. Consider,

template <class T>
T FOO (void) {
return T(); // Default construction
}

template <class T>
T BAR (void) {
return FOO<T>(); // Syntactic consistency. Same for int, void and everything else.
}

int main (void) {
BAR<void>();
}

It suddenly makes sense when templates are in picture. Take home point: Syntactic consistency is of paramount importance for supporting generic programming and writing generic libraries.

Comments

This is a *lovely* blog with a great set of articles and pointers to modern C++ programming.

I come from a Java background and have only begun to recently write C++ API's and I realize that the modern C++ way of doing things (generic programming) is just *so* totally different from OOP.

It's no wonder that people find it obtuse. :)
Sumant said…
Thanks, I'm glad that you liked it.
Dascandy said…
Since when is this allowed? That could save me hundreds of lines of generic code, written for compilers hating me returning some other functions' void as my own...

In particular, do you have a iso14882 reference for this?
Sumant said…
@Dascandy - Section 6.6.3 [stmt.return] of ISO-14882 and the C++0x public draft says: "A return statement with an expression of type “cv void” can be used only in functions with a return type of cv void;"
Dascandy said…
I recall where it went wrong. I needed to be able to store the to-be-return-value somewhere and retrieve it too. Since you can't store a void (void *x = new void(); doesn't work) and you can't retrieve a void from it again (return *(void *)x; also doesn't work) you can't really use this generically.

And you can't even overload the function template that hides this, so I had to make another N overloads to hide that again.

Too bad they didn't pull this through all the way.
Zahid Ghadialy said…
Interesting post Sumant. One thing that always intrigues me is that why do interviews have such questions. I know of people who can clear these kind of interviews but they are not really good programmers and struggle with day to day coding.

Anyway, I will blog on this topic here:
http://advancedcppwithexamples.blogspot.com/
Viktor said…
Altough its an interesting problem, unless the job is finding bugs in a c++ compiler, it's a very strange interview question.
Cool Stuff, can you check out my C++ Code Samples too?
Anonymous said…
I don't remember where i read it, but the possibility to return void was meant to ease writing programs that generate C code. i think I read it in "the design and evolution of c++", but am not sure.
Icila said…
I'm writing in C and I receive the " 'return' with a value, in function returning void" warning like you did in a program of my own, but my compiler refuses to compile with this warning. is there a way around it?
xander345 said…
if you like c++ you can compile it online here: http://codecompiler.info/

32, 64 - windows & Linux - and more programming languages
mounzit said…
ya this is good blog helping me to understand some truths of C++:)

Popular posts from this blog

Multi-dimensional arrays in C++11

What new can be said about multi-dimensional arrays in C++? As it turns out, quite a bit! With the advent of C++11, we get new standard library class std::array. We also get new language features, such as template aliases and variadic templates. So I'll talk about interesting ways in which they come together.

It all started with a simple question of how to define a multi-dimensional std::array. It is a great example of deceptively simple things. Are the following the two arrays identical except that one is native and the other one is std::array?

int native[3][4];
std::array<std::array<int, 3>, 4> arr;

No! They are not. In fact, arr is more like an int[4][3]. Note the difference in the array subscripts. The native array is an array of 3 elements where every element is itself an array of 4 integers. 3 rows and 4 columns. If you want a std::array with the same layout, what you really need is:

std::array<std::array<int, 4>, 3> arr;

That's quite annoying for two r…

Inheritance vs std::variant

C++17 added std::variant and std::visit in its repertoire. They are worth a close examination. I've been wondering about whether they are always better than inheritance for modeling sum-types (fancy name for discriminated unions) and if not, under what circumstances they are not. We'll compare the two approaches in this blog post. So here it goes.

Inheritancestd::variantNeed not know all the derived types upfront (open-world assumption)Must know all the cases upfront (closed-world assumption)Dynamic Allocation (usually)No dynamic allocationIntrusive (must inherit from the base class)Non-intrusive (third-party classes can participate)Reference semantics (think how you copy a vector of pointers to base class?)Value semantics (copying is trivial)Algorithm scattered into classesAlgorithm in one placeLanguage supported (Clear errors if pure-virtual is not implemented)Library supported (poor error messages)Creates a first-class abstractionIt’s just a containerKeeps fluent interfaces…

Covariance and Contravariance in C++ Standard Library

Covariance and Contravariance are concepts that come up often as you go deeper into generic programming. While designing a language that supports parametric polymorphism (e.g., templates in C++, generics in Java, C#), the language designer has a choice between Invariance, Covariance, and Contravariance when dealing with generic types. C++'s choice is "invariance". Let's look at an example.
struct Vehicle {}; struct Car : Vehicle {}; std::vector<Vehicle *> vehicles; std::vector<Car *> cars; vehicles = cars; // Does not compile The above program does not compile because C++ templates are invariant. Of course, each time a C++ template is instantiated, the compiler creates a brand new type that uniquely represents that instantiation. Any other type to the same template creates another unique type that has nothing to do with the earlier one. Any two unrelated user-defined types in C++ can't be assigned to each-other by default. You have to provide a c…