Thread: Operator overload question

I know that for + and - you use the following code;

Code:

complexClass complexClass::operator+ (complexClass a){}

But can I use similar codes for *, /, and ^? Are they the same?

Yes.
Pass by const reference:

Code:

complexClass complexClass::operator+ (const complexClass& a){}

Originally Posted by kmdv

Yes.
Pass by const reference:

Code:

complexClass complexClass::operator+ (const complexClass& a){}

no that's not right, if you use the one-parameter member function version then it should also be a const function.
However, for the operators that return a result by value, e.g. +, -, *, /, |, ^, & etc, you should use the two-parameter friend, static or non-member version.
e.g.

Code:

friend complexClass complexClass::operator+ (const complexClass &a, const complexClass &b)
{
    complexClass c;
    // ... blah blah ...
    return c;
}

Originally Posted by 843

Why do I need const and to pass by reference? Why don't the + and - operators need to?

All operators should. And the why is because it's more efficient. You don't need to make copies of the objects all the time.
And the const simply stops you from accidentally modifying the objects you are trying to work with.