Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Possible Duplicate:
What legitimate reasons exist to overload the unary operator& ?
I just read this question, and I can’t help but wonder:
Why would anyone possibly want to overload the & ("address-of") operator?
SomeClass* operator&() const {
return address_of_object;
}
Is there any legitimate use case?
If you’re dealing with any sort of wrapper objects, you might want or need to transparently forward the access to the wrapper to the contained object. In that case, you can’t return a pointer to the wrapper, but need to overload the address-of operator to return a pointer to the contained object.