在GCC或clang中使用__builtin_trap()，在MSVC中使用__debugbreak()。不处理这些断点/陷阱将导致未处理的断点异常/崩溃。 使用abort()或exit()的其他建议:这些可能由其他线程处理，使得更难看到传播崩溃的线程的堆栈。

答案是平台特定的，取决于你的目标。但这里是Mozilla Javascript崩溃函数，我认为这说明了很多挑战，使这个工作:

static JS_NEVER_INLINE void
CrashInJS()
{
    /*
     * We write 123 here so that the machine code for this function is
     * unique. Otherwise the linker, trying to be smart, might use the
     * same code for CrashInJS and for some other function. That
     * messes up the signature in minidumps.
     */

#if defined(WIN32)
    /*
     * We used to call DebugBreak() on Windows, but amazingly, it causes
     * the MSVS 2010 debugger not to be able to recover a call stack.
     */
    *((int *) NULL) = 123;
    exit(3);
#elif defined(__APPLE__)
    /*
     * On Mac OS X, Breakpad ignores signals. Only real Mach exceptions are
     * trapped.
     */
    *((int *) NULL) = 123;  /* To continue from here in GDB: "return" then "continue". */
    raise(SIGABRT);  /* In case above statement gets nixed by the optimizer. */
#else
    raise(SIGABRT);  /* To continue from here in GDB: "signal 0". */
#endif
}

int main()
{
    int *p=3;
    int s;
    while(1) {
        s=*p;
        p++;
    }
}

#include <thread>

void intentionalCrash()
{
    auto noop = [](){return;};
    // Thread t1 is in a joinable state.
    // When program returns t1 will be out of scope.
    // Destructing a joinable thread creates a crash.
    std::thread t1(noop);
}

int main()
{
    intentionalCrash();
    return 0;
}

虽然这个问题已经有了公认的答案……

void main(){
    throw 1;
}

还是……无效main(){throw 1;}

这个缺失了:

int main = 42;