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) {
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) {

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.


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:
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:

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…

Understanding Fold Expressions

C++17 has an interesting new feature called fold expressions. Fold expressions offer a compact syntax to apply a binary operation to the elements of a parameter pack. Here’s an example. template <typename... Args> auto addall(Args... args) { return (... + args); } addall(1,2,3,4,5); // returns 15. This particular example is a unary left fold. It's equivalent to ((((1+2)+3)+4)+5). It reduces/folds the parameter pack of integers into a single integer by applying the binary operator successively. It's unary because it does not explicitly specify an init (a.k.a. identity) argument. So, let add it. template <typename... Args> auto addall(Args... args) { return (0 + ... + args); } addall(1,2,3,4,5); // returns 15. This version of addall is a binary left fold. The init argument is 0 and it's redundant (in this case). That's because this fold expression is equivalent to (((((0+1)+2)+3)+4)+5). Explicit identity elements will come in handy a little la…

Folding Monadic Functions

In the previous two blog posts (Understanding Fold Expressions and Folding Functions) we looked at the basic usage of C++17 fold expressions and how simple functions can be folded to create a composite one. We’ll continue our stride and see how "embellished" functions may be composed in fold expressions.

First, let me define what I mean by embellished functions. Instead of just returning a simple value, these functions are going to return a generic container of the desired value. The choice of container is very broad but not arbitrary. There are some constraints on the container and once you select a generic container, all functions must return values of the same container. Let's begin with std::vector.
// Hide the allocator template argument of std::vector. // It causes problems and is irrelevant here. template <class T> struct Vector : std::vector<T> {}; struct Continent { }; struct Country { }; struct State { }; struct City { }; auto get_countries…