Exit please



  • I'm probably just being unfair to a newbie. But I found this question from a C forum to be very funny:

    when we use exit() function, do we use 0 or 1 ??. Both exits the function..




  • did you answer with the following:

    You use 0 except for when you use 1, because 1 is an exception, as are any other numbers. 



  • Just use abort() and be happy, dude!



  • Except for the punctuation and capitalization, there's nothing wrong with that question (except that google has the answer readily available). The answer isn't obvious - the whole idea of using a number to indicate a program-specific error is probably the only WTF here ;-)



  • Pfft. Real Programmers(tm) just kill(getpid(), SIGKILL);



  • @ahnfelt said:

    Except for the punctuation and capitalization, there's nothing wrong with that question (except that google has the answer readily available). The answer isn't obvious - the whole idea of using a number to indicate a program-specific error is probably the only WTF here ;-)

     The question phrasing seems to indicate he thought exit() exits a function (ie, in place of a return statement), though I'd have thought he'd notice very quickly that it does a bit more than that.
     



  • For the curious / bored, here's the post in question...



  • @Kemp said:

    @ahnfelt said:

    Except for the punctuation and capitalization, there's nothing wrong with that question (except that google has the answer readily available). The answer isn't obvious - the whole idea of using a number to indicate a program-specific error is probably the only WTF here ;-)

     The question phrasing seems to indicate he thought exit() exits a function (ie, in place of a return statement), though I'd have thought he'd notice very quickly that it does a bit more than that.
     

    I don't think so. For a return statement, the meaning of the parameter would be obvious. 



  • @RoadGrader said:

    For the curious / bored, here's the post in question...

     You your be ashamed to quote expert-exchange. It is indeed full of newbie questions and strange answer, that you can only read by deactivating css (or paying, but who would pay for that?)
     



  • @tchize said:

    that you can only read by deactivating css (or paying, but who would pay for that?)

    Or scrolling down. 



  • @Zecc said:

    @tchize said:

    that you can only read by deactivating css (or paying, but who would pay for that?)

    Or scrolling down. 

    Wow, so right....

    a) I can't believe I never noticed that.

    b) I don't get why they even bother trying to hide the solution up top.



  • @Zecc said:

    @tchize said:

    that you can only read by deactivating css (or paying, but who would pay for that?)

    Or scrolling down. 

    Dude. 



  • @dhromed said:

    @Zecc said:

    @tchize said:

    that you can only read by deactivating css (or paying, but who would pay for that?)

    Or scrolling down. 

    Dude. 

    Yes, it is indeed a WTF



  • @Zecc said:

    @tchize said:

    that you can only read by deactivating css (or paying, but who would pay for that?)

    Or scrolling down. 

     
    I still think this is one of the funniest things I've seen, and a huge WTF.  Shows the high regard they have for their users. 
     



  • @Spectre said:

    Just use abort() and be happy, dude!


    As a pro-fork()er, I must say I am shocked by this display of coldness. You probably kill -9, too, and have reaper threads to deal with children! Shame on you and your methods!



  • @halcyon said:

    @Spectre said:

    Just use abort() and be happy, dude!


    As a pro-fork()er, I must say I am shocked by this display of coldness. You probably kill -9, too, and have reaper threads to deal with children! Shame on you and your methods!

     

    reaper threads, rofl



  • Hmm.

        void exit(int parm)
        {
            parm/=0;
        }

    I wonder if anyone's ever implemented it that way?

     


Log in to reply