Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#Actualnoatom

Posted 19 June 2013 - 03:04 AM

Actually,it makes perfect sense to synthesize the = operator and not inherit it.I mean think about it: the synthesized one will just perform bit copy and call the = operator of the base class.

 

If it did keep the inherited one,then it would perform the required operations only on the base class part of the object.

 

This way,even though it's rudimentary,it performs basic bit copy for the current object too,while it also call the = operator for the base class.


#1noatom

Posted 19 June 2013 - 03:03 AM

Actually,it makes perfect sense to synthesize the = operator and not inherit it.I mean think about it: the synthesized one will just perform bit copy and call the = operator of the base class.

 

If it did keep the inherited one,then it would perform the required operation only on the base class part of the object.

 

This way,even though it's rudimentary,it performs basic bit copy for the current object too,while it also call the = operator for the base class.


PARTNERS