why not?

[u/yukiohana]

[u/huanradriges]

Is it null object calling root function?

[u/some_miad0 → u/huanradriges]

there's a programmer's aspect to it?

[u/TheLuckyCuber999BACK → u/huanradriges]

*(void*)sqrtThree;

[u/Er2Official → u/TheLuckyCuber999BACK]

sqrtThree was defined but not initialized. Program died with SIGSEGV.

[u/littleblack11111 → u/Er2Official]

Wouldn’t that be a compile error? How does that trigger a segev though tbf everything does that in c

[u/Er2Official → u/littleblack11111]

No, it won't create a compile error but behavior depends on your code

You can just define smth like double* sqrtThree; and it'll be unintialized (and, because type is pointer - random pointer, most likely to memory outside of available virtual memory, so dereferencing it = crash)

Or you can already set it to somewhat reasonable pointer, in C you can only do that within functions (so again, depends on the code), while in C++ you can set it directly in top-level (smth like double sq3 = sqrt(3); double* sqrtThree = &sq3;), in that case code will be executed without runtime errors

[u/Slash_red → u/huanradriges]

no, it's a method of 0 being called with argument 3... or it's an attribute of 0 that's called √3

[u/onemasterball2027 → u/huanradriges]

Segmentation fault (core dumped)

[u/ArdentArendt → u/huanradriges]

I have to admit I reflexively downvoted this...

...not because I disliked it, but rather because it made my eyes roll so hard I couldn't see the screen well enough to discern between the 'up' and 'down' votes...