Question

Must I need to redefine all the overloading operators with derived type if I require to use them in derived class?

The following code compiles fine:

class Point {

public:

    Point(int X = 0, int Y = 0):x(X), y(Y) {}

    virtual ~Point() {}

    Point operator +(Point &rhs) {
        return Point(x + rhs.x, y + rhs.y);
    }

protected:
    int x, y;
};

class Vector : public Point {

public:

    Vector(int X, int Y) : Point(X, Y) {}

    ~Vector() {}

    Vector operator +(Vector &rhs) {
        return Vector(x + rhs.x, y + rhs.y);
    }
};

int main()
{
    Vector v1(1, 2);
    Vector v2(3, 2);

    Vector v3 = v2 + v1;
}

But from what I’ve read,

C++ Primer 4th Ed. Section 15.5.3.

If a derived class wants to make all the overloaded versions available through its type, then it must either redefine all of them or none of them.

Does the part of the quote “none of them” make any sense here?

Answer 1

What it means is that if Point had more than one operator+(), and you only redefined one of them, then only that one would be accessible in the derived class; the other overloads would be hidden. If you declare no operator+() in the derived class, then all of the parent ones are available; if you declare any in the derived class, then none of the parent ones are available.

Make sense? This case is fine: the parent declares one, and you redefine that one. No problems. If the parent declared two, though, then your child class, which only declares one, would only have access to that one.