overloaded assignment operator c example

21.12 — Overloading the assignment operator

• Sign In / Suggest an Article

Current ISO C++ status

Upcoming ISO C++ meetings

Upcoming C++ conferences

Compiler conformance status

ISO C++ committee meeting

June 24-29, St. Louis, MO, USA

July 2-5, Folkestone, Kent, UK

operator overloading

Operator overloading, what’s the deal with operator overloading.

It allows you to provide an intuitive interface to users of your class, plus makes it possible for templates to work equally well with classes and built-in/intrinsic types.

Operator overloading allows C/C++ operators to have user-defined meanings on user-defined types (classes). Overloaded operators are syntactic sugar for function calls:

What are the benefits of operator overloading?

By overloading standard operators on a class, you can exploit the intuition of the users of that class. This lets users program in the language of the problem domain rather than in the language of the machine.

The ultimate goal is to reduce both the learning curve and the defect rate.

What are some examples of operator overloading?

Here are a few of the many examples of operator overloading:

• myString + yourString might concatenate two std::string objects
• myDate++ might increment a Date object
• a * b might multiply two Number objects
• a[i] might access an element of an Array object
• x = *p might dereference a “smart pointer” that “points” to a disk record — it could seek to the location on disk where p “points” and return the appropriate record into x

But operator overloading makes my class look ugly; isn’t it supposed to make my code clearer?

Operator overloading makes life easier for the users of a class , not for the developer of the class!

Consider the following example.

Some people don’t like the keyword operator or the somewhat funny syntax that goes with it in the body of the class itself. But the operator overloading syntax isn’t supposed to make life easier for the developer of a class. It’s supposed to make life easier for the users of the class:

Remember: in a reuse-oriented world, there will usually be many people who use your class, but there is only one person who builds it (yourself); therefore you should do things that favor the many rather than the few.

What operators can/cannot be overloaded?

Most can be overloaded. The only C operators that can’t be are . and ?: (and sizeof , which is technically an operator). C++ adds a few of its own operators, most of which can be overloaded except :: and .* .

Here’s an example of the subscript operator (it returns a reference). First with out operator overloading:

Now the same logic is presented with operator overloading:

Why can’t I overload . (dot), :: , sizeof , etc.?

Most operators can be overloaded by a programmer. The exceptions are

There is no fundamental reason to disallow overloading of ?: . So far the committee just hasn’t seen the need to introduce the special case of overloading a ternary operator. Note that a function overloading expr1?expr2:expr3 would not be able to guarantee that only one of expr2 and expr3 was executed.

sizeof cannot be overloaded because built-in operations, such as incrementing a pointer into an array implicitly depends on it. Consider:

Thus, sizeof(X) could not be given a new and different meaning by the programmer without violating basic language rules.

What about :: ? In N::m neither N nor m are expressions with values; N and m are names known to the compiler and :: performs a (compile time) scope resolution rather than an expression evaluation. One could imagine allowing overloading of x::y where x is an object rather than a namespace or a class, but that would – contrary to first appearances – involve introducing new syntax (to allow expr::expr ). It is not obvious what benefits such a complication would bring.

operator. (dot) could in principle be overloaded using the same technique as used for -> . However, doing so can lead to questions about whether an operation is meant for the object overloading . or an object referred to by . . For example:

This problem can be solved in several ways. So far in standardization, it has not been obvious which way would be best. For more details, see D&E .

Can I define my own operators?

Sorry, no. The possibility has been considered several times, but each time it was decided that the likely problems outweighed the likely benefits.

It’s not a language-technical problem. Even when Stroustrup first considered it in 1983, he knew how it could be implemented. However, the experience has been that when we go beyond the most trivial examples people seem to have subtly different opinions of “the obvious” meaning of uses of an operator. A classical example is a**b**c . Assume that ** has been made to mean exponentiation. Now should a**b**c mean (a**b)**c or a**(b**c) ? Experts have thought the answer was obvious and their friends agreed – and then found that they didn’t agree on which resolution was the obvious one. Such problems seem prone to lead to subtle bugs.

Can I overload operator== so it lets me compare two char[] using a string comparison?

No: at least one operand of any overloaded operator must be of some user-defined type (most of the time that means a class ).

But even if C++ allowed you to do this, which it doesn’t, you wouldn’t want to do it anyway since you really should be using a std::string -like class rather than an array of char in the first place since arrays are evil .

Can I create a operator** for “to-the-power-of” operations?

The names of, precedence of, associativity of, and arity of operators is fixed by the language. There is no operator** in C++, so you cannot create one for a class type.

If you’re in doubt, consider that x ** y is the same as x * (*y) (in other words, the compiler assumes y is a pointer). Besides, operator overloading is just syntactic sugar for function calls. Although this particular syntactic sugar can be very sweet, it doesn’t add anything fundamental. I suggest you overload pow(base,exponent) (a double precision version is in <cmath> ).

By the way, operator^ can work for to-the-power-of, except it has the wrong precedence and associativity.

The previous FAQs tell me which operators I can override; but which operators should I override?

Bottom line: don’t confuse your users.

Remember the purpose of operator overloading: to reduce the cost and defect rate in code that uses your class. If you create operators that confuse your users (because they’re cool, because they make the code faster, because you need to prove to yourself that you can do it; doesn’t really matter why), you’ve violated the whole reason for using operator overloading in the first place.

What are some guidelines / “rules of thumb” for overloading operators?

Here are a few guidelines / rules of thumb (but be sure to read the previous FAQ before reading this list):

• Use common sense. If your overloaded operator makes life easier and safer for your users, do it; otherwise don’t. This is the most important guideline. In fact it is, in a very real sense, the only guideline; the rest are just special cases.
• If you define arithmetic operators, maintain the usual arithmetic identities. For example, if your class defines x + y and x - y , then x + y - y ought to return an object that is behaviorally equivalent to x . The term behaviorally equivalent is defined in the bullet on x == y below, but simply put, it means the two objects should ideally act like they have the same state. This should be true even if you decide not to define an == operator for objects of your class.
• You should provide arithmetic operators only when they make logical sense to users. Subtracting two dates makes sense, logically returning the duration between those dates, so you might want to allow date1 - date2 for objects of your Date class (provided you have a reasonable class/type to represent the duration between two Date objects). However adding two dates makes no sense: what does it mean to add July 4, 1776 to June 5, 1959? Similarly it makes no sense to multiply or divide dates, so you should not define any of those operators.
• You should provide mixed-mode arithmetic operators only when they make logical sense to users. For example, it makes sense to add a duration (say 35 days) to a date (say July 4, 1776), so you might define date + duration to return a Date . Similarly date - duration could also return a Date . But duration - date does not make sense at the conceptual level (what does it mean to subtract July 4, 1776 from 35 days?) so you should not define that operator.
• If you provide constructive operators, they should return their result by value. For example, x + y should return its result by value. If it returns by reference, you will probably run into lots of problems figuring out who owns the referent and when the referent will get destructed. Doesn’t matter if returning by reference is more efficient; it is probably wrong . See the next bullet for more on this point.
• If you provide constructive operators, they should not change their operands. For example, x + y should not change x . For some crazy reason, programmers often define x + y to be logically the same as x += y because the latter is faster. But remember, your users expect x + y to make a copy. In fact they selected the + operator (over, say, the += operator) precisely because they wanted a copy. If they wanted to modify x , they would have used whatever is equivalent to x += y instead. Don’t make semantic decisions for your users; it’s their decision, not yours, whether they want the semantics of x + y vs. x += y . Tell them that one is faster if you want, but then step back and let them make the final decision — they know what they’re trying to achieve and you do not.
• If you provide constructive operators, they should allow promotion of the left-hand operand (at least in the case where the class has a single-parameter ctor that is not marked with the explicit keyword ). For example, if your class Fraction supports promotion from int to Fraction (via the non- explicit ctor Fraction::Fraction(int) ), and if you allow x - y for two Fraction objects, you should also allow 42 - y . In practice that simply means that your operator-() should not be a member function of Fraction . Typically you will make it a friend , if for no other reason than to force it into the public: part of the class , but even if it is not a friend, it should not be a member.
• In general, your operator should change its operand(s) if and only if the operands get changed when you apply the same operator to intrinsic types. x == y and x << y should not change either operand; x *= y and x <<= y should (but only the left-hand operand).
• If you define x++ and ++x , maintain the usual identities. For example, x++ and ++x should have the same observable effect on x , and should differ only in what they return. ++x should return x by reference; x++ should either return a copy (by value) of the original state of x or should have a void return-type. You’re usually better off returning a copy of the original state of x by value, especially if your class will be used in generic algorithms. The easy way to do that is to implement x++ using three lines: make a local copy of *this , call ++x (i.e., this->operator++() ), then return the local copy. Similar comments for x-- and --x .
• If you define ++x and x += 1 , maintain the usual identities. For example, these expressions should have the same observable behavior, including the same result. Among other things, that means your += operator should return x by reference. Similar comments for --x and x -= 1 .
• If you define *p and p[0] for pointer-like objects, maintain the usual identities. For example, these two expressions should have the same result and neither should change p .
• If you define p[i] and *(p+i) for pointer-like objects, maintain the usual identities. For example, these two expressions should have the same result and neither should change p . Similar comments for p[-i] and *(p-i) .
• Subscript operators generally come in pairs; see on const -overloading .
• If you define x == y , then x == y should be true if and only if the two objects are behaviorally equivalent. In this bullet, the term “behaviorally equivalent” means the observable behavior of any operation or sequence of operations applied to x will be the same as when applied to y . The term “operation” means methods, friends, operators, or just about anything else you can do with these objects (except, of course, the address-of operator). You won’t always be able to achieve that goal, but you ought to get close, and you ought to document any variances (other than the address-of operator).
• If you define x == y and x = y , maintain the usual identities. For example, after an assignment, the two objects should be equal. Even if you don’t define x == y , the two objects should be behaviorally equivalent (see above for the meaning of that phrase) after an assignment.
• If you define x == y and x != y , you should maintain the usual identities. For example, these expressions should return something convertible to bool , neither should change its operands, and x == y should have the same result as !(x != y) , and vice versa.
• If you define inequality operators like x <= y and x < y , you should maintain the usual identities. For example, if x < y and y < z are both true, then x < z should also be true, etc. Similar comments for x >= y and x > y .
• If you define inequality operators like x < y and x >= y , you should maintain the usual identities. For example, x < y should have the result as !(x >= y) . You can’t always do that, but you should get close and you should document any variances. Similar comments for x > y and !(x <= y) , etc.
• Avoid overloading short-circuiting operators: x || y or x && y . The overloaded versions of these do not short-circuit — they evaluate both operands even if the left-hand operand “determines” the outcome, so that confuses users.
• Avoid overloading the comma operator: x, y . The overloaded comma operator does not have the same ordering properties that it has when it is not overloaded, and that confuses users.
• Don’t overload an operator that is non-intuitive to your users. This is called the Doctrine of Least Surprise. For example, although C++ uses std::cout << x for printing, and although printing is technically called inserting, and although inserting sort of sounds like what happens when you push an element onto a stack, don’t overload myStack << x to push an element onto a stack. It might make sense when you’re really tired or otherwise mentally impaired, and a few of your friends might think it’s “kewl,” but just say No.
• Use common sense. If you don’t see “your” operator listed here, you can figure it out. Just remember the ultimate goals of operator overloading: to make life easier for your users, in particular to make their code cheaper to write and more obvious.

Caveat: the list is not exhaustive. That means there are other entries that you might consider “missing.” I know.

Caveat: the list contains guidelines, not hard and fast rules. That means almost all of the entries have exceptions, and most of those exceptions are not explicitly stated. I know.

Caveat: please don’t email me about the additions or exceptions. I’ve already spent way too much time on this particular answer.

How do I create a subscript operator for a Matrix class?

Use operator() rather than operator[] .

When you have multiple subscripts, the cleanest way to do it is with operator() rather than with operator[] . The reason is that operator[] always takes exactly one parameter, but operator() can take any number of parameters (in the case of a rectangular matrix, two parameters are needed).

For example:

Then you can access an element of Matrix m using m(i,j) rather than m[i][j] :

See the next FAQ for more detail on the reasons to use m(i,j) vs. m[i][j] .

Why shouldn’t my Matrix class’s interface look like an array-of-array?

Here’s what this FAQ is really all about: Some people build a Matrix class that has an operator[] that returns a reference to an Array object (or perhaps to a raw array , shudder), and that Array object has an operator[] that returns an element of the Matrix (e.g., a reference to a double ). Thus they access elements of the matrix using syntax like m[i][j] rather than syntax like m(i,j) .

The array-of-array solution obviously works, but it is less flexible than the operator() approach . Specifically, there are easy performance tuning tricks that can be done with the operator() approach that are more difficult in the [][] approach, and therefore the [][] approach is more likely to lead to bad performance, at least in some cases.

For example, the easiest way to implement the [][] approach is to use a physical layout of the matrix as a dense matrix that is stored in row-major form (or is it column-major; I can’t ever remember). In contrast, the operator() approach totally hides the physical layout of the matrix, and that can lead to better performance in some cases.

Put it this way: the operator() approach is never worse than, and sometimes better than, the [][] approach.

• The operator() approach is never worse because it is easy to implement the dense, row-major physical layout using the operator() approach, so when that configuration happens to be the optimal layout from a performance standpoint, the operator() approach is just as easy as the [][] approach (perhaps the operator() approach is a tiny bit easier, but I won’t quibble over minor nits).
• The operator() approach is sometimes better because whenever the optimal layout for a given application happens to be something other than dense, row-major, the implementation is often significantly easier using the operator() approach compared to the [][] approach.

As an example of when a physical layout makes a significant difference, a recent project happened to access the matrix elements in columns (that is, the algorithm accesses all the elements in one column, then the elements in another, etc.), and if the physical layout is row-major, the accesses can “stride the cache”. For example, if the rows happen to be almost as big as the processor’s cache size, the machine can end up with a “cache miss” for almost every element access. In this particular project, we got a 20% improvement in performance by changing the mapping from the logical layout (row,column) to the physical layout (column,row).

Of course there are many examples of this sort of thing from numerical methods, and sparse matrices are a whole other dimension on this issue. Since it is, in general, easier to implement a sparse matrix or swap row/column ordering using the operator() approach, the operator() approach loses nothing and may gain something — it has no down-side and a potential up-side.

Use the operator() approach .

I still don’t get it. Why shouldn’t my Matrix class’s interface look like an array-of-array?

The same reasons you encapsulate your data structures, and the same reason you check parameters to make sure they are valid.

A few people use [][] despite its limitations , arguing that [][] is better because it is faster or because it uses C-syntax. The problem with the “it’s faster” argument is that it’s not — at least not on the latest version of two of the world’s best known C++ compilers. The problem with the “uses C-syntax” argument is that C++ is not C. Plus, oh yea, the C-syntax makes it harder to change the data structure and harder to check parameter values.

The point of the previous two FAQs is that m(i,j) gives you a clean, simple way to check all the parameters and to hide (and therefore, if you want to, change) the internal data structure. The world already has way too many exposed data structures and way too many out-of-bounds parameters, and those cost way too much money and cause way too many delays and way too many defects.

Now everybody knows that you are different. You are clairvoyant with perfect knowledge of the future, and you know that no one will ever find any benefit from changing your matrix’s internal data structure. Plus you are a good programmer, unlike those slobs out there that occasionally pass wrong parameters, so you don’t need to worry about pesky little things like parameter checking. But even though you don’t need to worry about maintenance costs (no one ever needs to change your code), there might be one or two other programmers who aren’t quite perfect yet. For them, maintenance costs are high, defects are real, and requirements change. Believe it or not, every once in a while they need to (better sit down) change their code.

Admittedly my thongue wath in my theek. But there was a point. The point was that encapsulation and parameter-checking are not crutches for the weak. It’s smart to use techniques that make encapsulation and/or parameter checking easy. The m(i,j) syntax is one of those techniques.

Having said all that, if you find yourself maintaining a billion-line app where the original team used m[i][j] , or even if you are writing a brand new app and you just plain want to use m[i][j] , you can still encapsulate the data structure and/or check all your parameters. It’s not even that hard. However it does require a level of sophistication that, like it or not, average C++ programmers fear. Fortunately you are not average, so read on.

If you merely want to check parameters, just make sure the outer operator[] returns an object rather than a raw array , then that object’s operator[] can check its parameter in the usual way. Beware that this can slow down your program. In particular, if these inner array-like objects end up allocating their own block of memory for their row of the matrix, the performance overhead for creating / destroying your matrix objects can grow dramatically. The theoretical cost is still O( rows × cols ), but in practice, the overhead of the memory allocator ( new or malloc ) can be much larger than anything else, and that overhead can swamp the other costs. For instance, on two of the world’s best known C++ compilers, the separate-allocation-per-row technique was 10x slower than the one-allocation-for-the-entire-matrix technique . 10% is one thing, 10x is another.

If you want to check the parameters without the above overhead and/or if you want to encapsulate (and possibly change) the matrix’s internal data structure, follow these steps:

• Add operator()(unsigned row, unsigned col) to the Matrix class.
• Create nested class Matrix::Row . It should have a ctor with parameters (Matrix& matrix, unsigned row) , and it should store those two values in its this object.
• Change Matrix::operator[](unsigned row) so it returns an object of class Matrix::Row , e.g., { return Row(*this,row); } .
• Class Matrix::Row then defines its own operator[](unsigned col) which turns around and calls, you guessed it, Matrix::operator()(unsigned row, unsigned col) . If the Matrix::Row data members are called Matrix& matrix_ and unsigned row_ , the code for Matrix::Row::operator[](unsigned col) will be { return matrix_(row_, col); }

Next you will enable const overloading by repeating the above steps. You will create the const version of the various methods, and you will create a new nested class, probably called Matrix::ConstRow . Don’t forget to use const Matrix& instead of Matrix& .

Final step: find the joker who failed to read the previous FAQ and thonk him in the noggin.

If you have a decent compiler and if you judiciously use inlining , the compiler should optimize away the temporary objects. In other words, the operator[] -approach above will hopefully not be slower than what it would have been if you had directly called Matrix::operator()(unsigned row, unsigned col) in the first place. Of course you could have made your life simpler and avoided most of the above work by directly calling Matrix::operator()(unsigned row, unsigned col) in the first place. So you might as well directly call Matrix::operator()(unsigned row, unsigned col) in the first place.

Should I design my classes from the outside (interfaces first) or from the inside (data first)?

From the outside!

A good interface provides a simplified view that is expressed in the vocabulary of a user . In the case of OO software, the interface is normally the set of public methods of either a single class or a tight group of classes .

First think about what the object logically represents, not how you intend to physically build it. For example, suppose you have a Stack class that will be built by containing a LinkedList :

Should the Stack have a get() method that returns the LinkedList ? Or a set() method that takes a LinkedList ? Or a constructor that takes a LinkedList ? Obviously the answer is No, since you should design your interfaces from the outside-in. I.e., users of Stack objects don’t care about LinkedList s; they care about pushing and popping.

Now for another example that is a bit more subtle. Suppose class LinkedList is built using a linked list of Node objects, where each Node object has a pointer to the next Node :

Should the LinkedList class have a get() method that will let users access the first Node ? Should the Node object have a get() method that will let users follow that Node to the next Node in the chain? In other words, what should a LinkedList look like from the outside? Is a LinkedList really a chain of Node objects? Or is that just an implementation detail? And if it is just an implementation detail, how will the LinkedList let users access each of the elements in the LinkedList one at a time?

The key insight is the realization that a LinkedList is not a chain of Node s. That may be how it is built, but that is not what it is. What it is is a sequence of elements. Therefore the LinkedList abstraction should provide a LinkedListIterator class as well, and that LinkedListIterator might have an operator++ to go to the next element, and it might have a get() / set() pair to access its value stored in the Node (the value in the Node element is solely the responsibility of the LinkedList user, which is why there is a get() / set() pair that allows the user to freely manipulate that value).

Starting from the user’s perspective, we might want our LinkedList class to support operations that look similar to accessing an array using pointer arithmetic:

To implement this interface, LinkedList will need a begin() method and an end() method. These return a LinkedListIterator object. The LinkedListIterator will need a method to go forward, ++p ; a method to access the current element, *p ; and a comparison operator, p != a.end() .

The code follows. The important thing to notice is that LinkedList does not have any methods that let users access Node s. Node s are an implementation technique that is completely buried. This makes the LinkedList class safer (no chance a user will mess up the invariants and linkages between the various nodes), easier to use (users don’t need to expend extra effort keeping the node-count equal to the actual number of nodes, or any other infrastructure stuff), and more flexible (by changing a single typedef , users could change their code from using LinkedList to some other list-like class and the bulk of their code would compile cleanly and hopefully with improved performance characteristics).

Here are the methods that are obviously inlinable (probably in the same header file):

Conclusion: The linked list had two different kinds of data. The values of the elements stored in the linked list are the responsibility of the user of the linked list (and only the user; the linked list itself makes no attempt to prohibit users from changing the third element to 5), and the linked list’s infrastructure data ( next pointers, etc.), whose values are the responsibility of the linked list (and only the linked list; e.g., the linked list does not let users change (or even look at!) the various next pointers).

Thus the only get() / set() methods were to get and set the elements of the linked list, but not the infrastructure of the linked list. Since the linked list hides the infrastructure pointers/etc., it is able to make very strong promises regarding that infrastructure (e.g., if it were a doubly linked list, it might guarantee that every forward pointer was matched by a backwards pointer from the next Node ).

So, we see here an example of where the values of some of a class’s data is the responsibility of users (in which case the class needs to have get() / set() methods for that data) but the data that the class wants to control does not necessarily have get() / set() methods.

Note: the purpose of this example is not to show you how to write a linked-list class. In fact you should not “roll your own” linked-list class since you should use one of the “container classes” provided with your compiler. Ideally you’ll use one of the standard container classes such as the std::list<T> template.

How can I overload the prefix and postfix forms of operators ++ and -- ?

Via a dummy parameter.

Since the prefix and postfix ++ operators can have two definitions, the C++ language gives us two different signatures. Both are called operator++() , but the prefix version takes no parameters and the postfix version takes a dummy int . (Although this discussion revolves around the ++ operator, the -- operator is completely symmetric, and all the rules and guidelines that apply to one also apply to the other.)

Note the different return types: the prefix version returns by reference, the postfix version by value. If that’s not immediately obvious to you, it should be after you see the definitions (and after you remember that y = x++ and y = ++x set y to different things).

The other option for the postfix version is to return nothing:

However you must not make the postfix version return the this object by reference; you have been warned.

Here’s how you use these operators:

Assuming the return types are not ‘void’, you can use them in larger expressions:

Which is more efficient: i++ or ++i ?

++i is sometimes faster than, and is never slower than, i++ .

For intrinsic types like int , it doesn’t matter: ++i and i++ are the same speed. For class types like iterators or the previous FAQ’s Number class, ++i very well might be faster than i++ since the latter might make a copy of the this object.

The overhead of i++ , if it is there at all, won’t probably make any practical difference unless your app is CPU bound. For example, if your app spends most of its time waiting for someone to click a mouse, doing disk I/O, network I/O, or database queries, then it won’t hurt your performance to waste a few CPU cycles. However it’s just as easy to type ++i as i++ , so why not use the former unless you actually need the old value of i .

So if you’re writing i++ as a statement rather than as part of a larger expression, why not just write ++i instead? You never lose anything, and you sometimes gain something. Old line C programmers are used to writing i++ instead of ++i . E.g., they’ll say, for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) ... . Since this uses i++ as a statement, not as a part of a larger expression, then you might want to use ++i instead. For symmetry, I personally advocate that style even when it doesn’t improve speed, e.g., for intrinsic types and for class types with postfix operators that return void .

Obviously when i++ appears as a part of a larger expression, that’s different: it’s being used because it’s the only logically correct solution, not because it’s an old habit you picked up while programming in C.

Please Login to submit a recommendation.

If you don’t have an account, you can register for free.

This browser is no longer supported.

Upgrade to Microsoft Edge to take advantage of the latest features, security updates, and technical support.

General Rules for Operator Overloading

• 7 contributors

The following rules constrain how overloaded operators are implemented. However, they do not apply to the new and delete operators, which are covered separately.

You cannot define new operators, such as . .

You cannot redefine the meaning of operators when applied to built-in data types.

Overloaded operators must either be a nonstatic class member function or a global function. A global function that needs access to private or protected class members must be declared as a friend of that class. A global function must take at least one argument that is of class or enumerated type or that is a reference to a class or enumerated type. For example:

The preceding code sample declares the less-than operator as a member function; however, the addition operators are declared as global functions that have friend access. Note that more than one implementation can be provided for a given operator. In the case of the preceding addition operator, the two implementations are provided to facilitate commutativity. It is just as likely that operators that add a Point to a Point , int to a Point , and so on, might be implemented.

Operators obey the precedence, grouping, and number of operands dictated by their typical use with built-in types. Therefore, there is no way to express the concept "add 2 and 3 to an object of type Point ," expecting 2 to be added to the x coordinate and 3 to be added to the y coordinate.

Unary operators declared as member functions take no arguments; if declared as global functions, they take one argument.

Binary operators declared as member functions take one argument; if declared as global functions, they take two arguments.

If an operator can be used as either a unary or a binary operator ( & , * , + , and - ), you can overload each use separately.

Overloaded operators cannot have default arguments.

All overloaded operators except assignment ( operator= ) are inherited by derived classes.

The first argument for member-function overloaded operators is always of the class type of the object for which the operator is invoked (the class in which the operator is declared, or a class derived from that class). No conversions are supplied for the first argument.

Note that the meaning of any of the operators can be changed completely. That includes the meaning of the address-of ( & ), assignment ( = ), and function-call operators. Also, identities that can be relied upon for built-in types can be changed using operator overloading. For example, the following four statements are usually equivalent when completely evaluated:

This identity cannot be relied upon for class types that overload operators. Moreover, some of the requirements implicit in the use of these operators for basic types are relaxed for overloaded operators. For example, the addition/assignment operator, += , requires the left operand to be an l-value when applied to basic types; there is no such requirement when the operator is overloaded.

For consistency, it is often best to follow the model of the built-in types when defining overloaded operators. If the semantics of an overloaded operator differ significantly from its meaning in other contexts, it can be more confusing than useful.

Operator Overloading

Was this page helpful?

Coming soon: Throughout 2024 we will be phasing out GitHub Issues as the feedback mechanism for content and replacing it with a new feedback system. For more information see: https://aka.ms/ContentUserFeedback .

Submit and view feedback for

Additional resources

C++ Operator Overloading Guidelines

One of the nice features of C++ is that you can give special meanings to operators, when they are used with user-defined classes. This is called operator overloading . You can implement C++ operator overloads by providing special member-functions on your classes that follow a particular naming convention. For example, to overload the + operator for your class, you would provide a member-function named operator+ on your class.

• = (assignment operator)
• + - * (binary arithmetic operators)
• += -= *= (compound assignment operators)
• == != (comparison operators)

Here are some guidelines for implementing these operators. These guidelines are very important to follow, so definitely get in the habit early.

Assignment Operator =

The assignment operator has a signature like this: class MyClass { public: ... MyClass & operator=(const MyClass &rhs); ... } MyClass a, b; ... b = a; // Same as b.operator=(a);

Notice that the = operator takes a const-reference to the right hand side of the assignment. The reason for this should be obvious, since we don't want to change that value; we only want to change what's on the left hand side.

• e = 42 assigns 42 to e , then returns e as the result
• The value of e is then assigned to d , and then d is returned as the result
• The value of d is then assigned to c , and then c is returned as the result

Now, in order to support operator chaining, the assignment operator must return some value. The value that should be returned is a reference to the left-hand side of the assignment.

Notice that the returned reference is not declared const . This can be a bit confusing, because it allows you to write crazy stuff like this: MyClass a, b, c; ... (a = b) = c; // What?? At first glance, you might want to prevent situations like this, by having operator= return a const reference. However, statements like this will work with primitive types. And, even worse, some tools actually rely on this behavior. Therefore, it is important to return a non- const reference from your operator= . The rule of thumb is, "If it's good enough for int s, it's good enough for user-defined data-types."

So, for the hypothetical MyClass assignment operator, you would do something like this: // Take a const-reference to the right-hand side of the assignment. // Return a non-const reference to the left-hand side. MyClass& MyClass::operator=(const MyClass &rhs) { ... // Do the assignment operation! return *this; // Return a reference to myself. } Remember, this is a pointer to the object that the member function is being called on. Since a = b is treated as a.operator=(b) , you can see why it makes sense to return the object that the function is called on; object a is the left-hand side.

But, the member function needs to return a reference to the object, not a pointer to the object. So, it returns *this , which returns what this points at (i.e. the object), not the pointer itself. (In C++, instances are turned into references, and vice versa, pretty much automatically, so even though *this is an instance, C++ implicitly converts it into a reference to the instance.)

Now, one more very important point about the assignment operator:

YOU MUST CHECK FOR SELF-ASSIGNMENT!

This is especially important when your class does its own memory allocation. Here is why: The typical sequence of operations within an assignment operator is usually something like this: MyClass& MyClass::operator=(const MyClass &rhs) { // 1. Deallocate any memory that MyClass is using internally // 2. Allocate some memory to hold the contents of rhs // 3. Copy the values from rhs into this instance // 4. Return *this } Now, what happens when you do something like this: MyClass mc; ... mc = mc; // BLAMMO. You can hopefully see that this would wreak havoc on your program. Because mc is on the left-hand side and on the right-hand side, the first thing that happens is that mc releases any memory it holds internally. But, this is where the values were going to be copied from, since mc is also on the right-hand side! So, you can see that this completely messes up the rest of the assignment operator's internals.

The easy way to avoid this is to CHECK FOR SELF-ASSIGNMENT. There are many ways to answer the question, "Are these two instances the same?" But, for our purposes, just compare the two objects' addresses. If they are the same, then don't do assignment. If they are different, then do the assignment.

So, the correct and safe version of the MyClass assignment operator would be this: MyClass& MyClass::operator=(const MyClass &rhs) { // Check for self-assignment! if (this == &rhs) // Same object? return *this; // Yes, so skip assignment, and just return *this. ... // Deallocate, allocate new space, copy values... return *this; } Or, you can simplify this a bit by doing: MyClass& MyClass::operator=(const MyClass &rhs) { // Only do assignment if RHS is a different object from this. if (this != &rhs) { ... // Deallocate, allocate new space, copy values... } return *this; } Remember that in the comparison, this is a pointer to the object being called, and &rhs is a pointer to the object being passed in as the argument. So, you can see that we avoid the dangers of self-assignment with this check.

• Take a const-reference for the argument (the right-hand side of the assignment).
• Return a reference to the left-hand side, to support safe and reasonable operator chaining. (Do this by returning *this .)
• Check for self-assignment, by comparing the pointers ( this to &rhs ).

Compound Assignment Operators += -= *=

I discuss these before the arithmetic operators for a very specific reason, but we will get to that in a moment. The important point is that these are destructive operators, because they update or replace the values on the left-hand side of the assignment. So, you write: MyClass a, b; ... a += b; // Same as a.operator+=(b) In this case, the values within a are modified by the += operator.

How those values are modified isn't very important - obviously, what MyClass represents will dictate what these operators mean.

The member function signature for such an operator should be like this: MyClass & MyClass::operator+=(const MyClass &rhs) { ... } We have already covered the reason why rhs is a const-reference. And, the implementation of such an operation should also be straightforward.

But, you will notice that the operator returns a MyClass -reference, and a non-const one at that. This is so you can do things like this: MyClass mc; ... (mc += 5) += 3;

Don't ask me why somebody would want to do this, but just like the normal assignment operator, this is allowed by the primitive data types. Our user-defined datatypes should match the same general characteristics of the primitive data types when it comes to operators, to make sure that everything works as expected.

This is very straightforward to do. Just write your compound assignment operator implementation, and return *this at the end, just like for the regular assignment operator. So, you would end up with something like this: MyClass & MyClass::operator+=(const MyClass &rhs) { ... // Do the compound assignment work. return *this; }

As one last note, in general you should beware of self-assignment with compound assignment operators as well. Fortunately, none of the C++ track's labs require you to worry about this, but you should always give it some thought when you are working on your own classes.

Binary Arithmetic Operators + - *

The binary arithmetic operators are interesting because they don't modify either operand - they actually return a new value from the two arguments. You might think this is going to be an annoying bit of extra work, but here is the secret:

Define your binary arithmetic operators using your compound assignment operators.

There, I just saved you a bunch of time on your homeworks.

So, you have implemented your += operator, and now you want to implement the + operator. The function signature should be like this: // Add this instance's value to other, and return a new instance // with the result. const MyClass MyClass::operator+(const MyClass &other) const { MyClass result = *this; // Make a copy of myself. Same as MyClass result(*this); result += other; // Use += to add other to the copy. return result; // All done! } Simple!

Actually, this explicitly spells out all of the steps, and if you want, you can combine them all into a single statement, like so: // Add this instance's value to other, and return a new instance // with the result. const MyClass MyClass::operator+(const MyClass &other) const { return MyClass(*this) += other; } This creates an unnamed instance of MyClass , which is a copy of *this . Then, the += operator is called on the temporary value, and then returns it.

If that last statement doesn't make sense to you yet, then stick with the other way, which spells out all of the steps. But, if you understand exactly what is going on, then you can use that approach.

You will notice that the + operator returns a const instance, not a const reference. This is so that people can't write strange statements like this: MyClass a, b, c; ... (a + b) = c; // Wuh...? This statement would basically do nothing, but if the + operator returns a non- const value, it will compile! So, we want to return a const instance, so that such madness will not even be allowed to compile.

• Implement the compound assignment operators from scratch, and then define the binary arithmetic operators in terms of the corresponding compound assignment operators.
• Return a const instance, to prevent worthless and confusing assignment operations that shouldn't be allowed.

Comparison Operators == and !=

The comparison operators are very simple. Define == first, using a function signature like this: bool MyClass::operator==(const MyClass &other) const { ... // Compare the values, and return a bool result. } The internals are very obvious and straightforward, and the bool return-value is also very obvious.

The important point here is that the != operator can also be defined in terms of the == operator, and you should do this to save effort. You can do something like this: bool MyClass::operator!=(const MyClass &other) const { return !(*this == other); } That way you get to reuse the hard work you did on implementing your == operator. Also, your code is far less likely to exhibit inconsistencies between == and != , since one is implemented in terms of the other.

Learn C++ practically and Get Certified .

Popular Tutorials

Popular examples, reference materials, learn c++ interactively, introduction to c++.

• Getting Started With C++
• Your First C++ Program
• C++ Comments

C++ Fundamentals

• C++ Keywords and Identifiers
• C++ Variables, Literals and Constants
• C++ Data Types
• C++ Type Modifiers
• C++ Constants
• C++ Basic Input/Output
• C++ Operators

Flow Control

• C++ Relational and Logical Operators
• C++ if, if...else and Nested if...else
• C++ for Loop
• C++ while and do...while Loop
• C++ break Statement
• C++ continue Statement
• C++ goto Statement
• C++ switch..case Statement

C++ Ternary Operator

• C++ Functions
• C++ Programming Default Arguments

C++ Function Overloading

• C++ Inline Functions
• C++ Recursion

Arrays and Strings

• C++ Array to Function
• C++ Multidimensional Arrays
• C++ String Class

Pointers and References

• C++ Pointers
• C++ Pointers and Arrays
• C++ References: Using Pointers
• C++ Call by Reference: Using pointers
• C++ Memory Management: new and delete

Structures and Enumerations

• C++ Structures
• C++ Structure and Function
• C++ Pointers to Structure
• C++ Enumeration

Object Oriented Programming

• C++ Classes and Objects
• C++ Constructors
• C++ Constructor Overloading
• C++ Destructors
• C++ Access Modifiers
• C++ Encapsulation
• C++ friend Function and friend Classes

Inheritance & Polymorphism

• C++ Inheritance
• C++ Public, Protected and Private Inheritance
• C++ Multiple, Multilevel and Hierarchical Inheritance
• C++ Function Overriding
• C++ Virtual Functions
• C++ Abstract Class and Pure Virtual Function

STL - Vector, Queue & Stack

• C++ Standard Template Library
• C++ STL Containers
• C++ std::array
• C++ Vectors
• C++ Forward List
• C++ Priority Queue

STL - Map & Set

• C++ Multimap
• C++ Multiset
• C++ Unordered Map
• C++ Unordered Set
• C++ Unordered Multiset
• C++ Unordered Multimap

STL - Iterators & Algorithms

• C++ Iterators
• C++ Algorithm
• C++ Functor

Additional Topics

• C++ Exceptions Handling
• C++ File Handling
• C++ Ranged for Loop
• C++ Nested Loop
• C++ Function Template
• C++ Class Templates
• C++ Type Conversion
• C++ Type Conversion Operators

C++ Operator Overloading

Advanced topics.

• C++ Namespaces
• C++ Preprocessors and Macros
• C++ Storage Class
• C++ Bitwise Operators
• C++ Buffers
• C++ istream
• C++ ostream

C++ Tutorials

• Subtract Complex Number Using Operator Overloading
• Increment ++ and Decrement -- Operator Overloading in C++ Programming
• Add Complex Numbers by Passing Structure to a Function

C++ Polymorphism

C++ Operator Precedence and Associativity

In C++, we can define how operators behave for user-defined types like class and structures For example,

The + operator, when used with values of type int , returns their sum. However, when used with objects of a user-defined type, it is an error.

In this case, we can define the behavior of the + operator to work with objects as well.

This concept of defining operators to work with objects and structure variables is known as operator overloading .

• Syntax for C++ Operator Overloading

The syntax for overloading an operator is similar to that of function with the addition of the operator keyword followed by the operator symbol.

• returnType - the return type of the function
• operator - a special keyword
• symbol - the operator we want to overload ( + , < , - , ++ , etc.)
• arguments - the arguments passed to the function
• Overloading the Binary + Operator

Following is a program to demonstrate the overloading of the + operator for the class Complex .

Here, we first created a friend function with a return type Complex .

The operator keyword followed by + indicates that we are overloading the + operator.

The function takes two arguments:

• Complex& indicates that we are passing objects by reference and obj1 and obj2 are references to Complex objects. This is an efficient approach because it avoids unnecessary copying, especially for large objects. To learn more, visit C++ References .
• const indicates that referenced objects are constant, meaning we cannot modify obj1 and obj2 within the function.

Inside the function, we created another Complex object, temp to store the result of addition.

We then add the real parts of two objects and store it into the real attribute of the temp object.

Similarly, we add the imaginary parts of the two objects and store them into the img attribute of the temp object.

At last, we return the temp object from the function.

We can also overload the operators using a member function instead of a friend function. For example,

In this case, the operator is invoked by the first operand. Meaning, the line

translates to

Here, the number of arguments to the operator function is reduced by one because the first argument is used to invoke the function.

The problem with this approach is, not all the time the first operand is an object of a user-defined type. For example:

That's why it is recommended to overload operator functions as a non-member function generally, defined as a friend function.

• Overloading ++ as a Prefix Operator

Following is a program to demonstrate the overloading of the ++ operator for the class Count .

Here, when we use ++count1; , the void operator ++ () is called. This increases the value attribute for the object count1 by 1.

Note : When we overload operators, we can use it to work in any way we like. For example, we could have used ++ to increase value by 100.

However, this makes our code confusing and difficult to understand. It's our job as a programmer to use operator overloading properly and in a consistent and intuitive way.

To overload the ++ operator as a Postfix Operator, we declare a member function operator++() with one argument having type int .

Here, when we use count1++; , the void operator ++ (int) is called. This increments the value attribute for the object count1 by 1.

Note : The argument int is just to indicate that the operator is used as a postfix operator.

• Things to Remember in C++ Operator Overloading

1. By default, operators = and & are already overloaded in C++. For example,

we can directly use the = operator to copy objects of the same class. Here, we do not need to create an operator function.

2. We cannot change the precedence and associativity of operators using operator overloading.

3. We cannot overload following operators in C++:

• :: (scope resolution)
• . (member selection)
• .* (member selection through pointer to function)
• ?: (ternary operator)
• sizeof operator
• typeid Operator

4. We cannot overload operators for fundamental data types like int , float , etc

• How to overload increment operator in right way?
• How to overload binary operator - to subtract complex numbers?
• Increment ++ and Decrement -- Operators

Table of Contents

• Introduction

Sorry about that.

Related Tutorials

C++ Tutorial

C Data Types

C operators.

• C Input and Output
• C Control Flow
• C Functions
• C Preprocessors

C File Handling

• C Cheatsheet

C Interview Questions

• C Programming Language Tutorial
• C Language Introduction
• Features of C Programming Language
• C Programming Language Standard
• C Hello World Program
• Compiling a C Program: Behind the Scenes
• Tokens in C
• Keywords in C

C Variables and Constants

• C Variables
• Constants in C
• Const Qualifier in C
• Different ways to declare variable as constant in C
• Scope rules in C
• Internal Linkage and External Linkage in C
• Global Variables in C
• Data Types in C
• Literals in C
• Escape Sequence in C
• Integer Promotions in C
• Character Arithmetic in C
• Type Conversion in C

C Input/Output

• Basic Input and Output in C
• Format Specifiers in C
• printf in C
• Scansets in C
• Formatted and Unformatted Input/Output functions in C with Examples
• Operators in C
• Arithmetic Operators in C
• Unary operators in C
• Relational Operators in C
• Bitwise Operators in C
• C Logical Operators

Assignment Operators in C

• Increment and Decrement Operators in C
• Conditional or Ternary Operator (?:) in C
• sizeof operator in C
• Operator Precedence and Associativity in C

C Control Statements Decision-Making

• Decision Making in C (if , if..else, Nested if, if-else-if )
• C - if Statement
• C if...else Statement
• C if else if ladder
• Switch Statement in C
• Using Range in switch Case in C
• while loop in C
• do...while Loop in C
• For Versus While
• Continue Statement in C
• Break Statement in C
• goto Statement in C
• User-Defined Function in C
• Parameter Passing Techniques in C
• Function Prototype in C
• How can I return multiple values from a function?
• main Function in C
• Implicit return type int in C
• Callbacks in C
• Nested functions in C
• Variadic functions in C
• _Noreturn function specifier in C
• Predefined Identifier __func__ in C
• C Library math.h Functions

C Arrays & Strings

• Properties of Array in C
• Multidimensional Arrays in C
• Initialization of Multidimensional Array in C
• Pass Array to Functions in C
• How to pass a 2D array as a parameter in C?
• What are the data types for which it is not possible to create an array?
• How to pass an array by value in C ?
• Strings in C
• Array of Strings in C
• What is the difference between single quoted and double quoted declaration of char array?
• C String Functions
• Pointer Arithmetics in C with Examples
• C - Pointer to Pointer (Double Pointer)
• Function Pointer in C
• How to declare a pointer to a function?
• Pointer to an Array | Array Pointer
• Difference between constant pointer, pointers to constant, and constant pointers to constants
• Pointer vs Array in C
• Dangling, Void , Null and Wild Pointers in C
• Near, Far and Huge Pointers in C
• restrict keyword in C

C User-Defined Data Types

• C Structures
• dot (.) Operator in C
• Structure Member Alignment, Padding and Data Packing
• Flexible Array Members in a structure in C
• Bit Fields in C
• Difference Between Structure and Union in C
• Anonymous Union and Structure in C
• Enumeration (or enum) in C

C Storage Classes

• Storage Classes in C
• extern Keyword in C
• Static Variables in C
• Initialization of static variables in C
• Static functions in C
• Understanding "volatile" qualifier in C | Set 2 (Examples)
• Understanding "register" keyword in C

C Memory Management

• Memory Layout of C Programs
• Dynamic Memory Allocation in C using malloc(), calloc(), free() and realloc()
• Difference Between malloc() and calloc() with Examples
• What is Memory Leak? How can we avoid?
• Dynamic Array in C
• How to dynamically allocate a 2D array in C?
• Dynamically Growing Array in C

C Preprocessor

• C Preprocessor Directives
• How a Preprocessor works in C?
• Header Files in C
• What’s difference between header files "stdio.h" and "stdlib.h" ?
• How to write your own header file in C?
• Macros and its types in C
• Interesting Facts about Macros and Preprocessors in C
• # and ## Operators in C
• How to print a variable name in C?
• Multiline macros in C
• Variable length arguments for Macros
• Branch prediction macros in GCC
• typedef versus #define in C
• Difference between #define and const in C?
• Basics of File Handling in C
• C fopen() function with Examples
• EOF, getc() and feof() in C
• fgets() and gets() in C language
• fseek() vs rewind() in C
• What is return type of getchar(), fgetc() and getc() ?
• Read/Write Structure From/to a File in C
• C Program to print contents of file
• C program to delete a file
• C Program to merge contents of two files into a third file
• What is the difference between printf, sprintf and fprintf?
• Difference between getc(), getchar(), getch() and getche()

Miscellaneous

• time.h header file in C with Examples
• Input-output system calls in C | Create, Open, Close, Read, Write
• Signals in C language
• Program error signals
• Socket Programming in C
• _Generics Keyword in C
• Multithreading in C
• C Programming Interview Questions (2024)
• Commonly Asked C Programming Interview Questions | Set 1
• Commonly Asked C Programming Interview Questions | Set 2
• Commonly Asked C Programming Interview Questions | Set 3

Assignment operators are used for assigning value to a variable. The left side operand of the assignment operator is a variable and right side operand of the assignment operator is a value. The value on the right side must be of the same data-type of the variable on the left side otherwise the compiler will raise an error.

Different types of assignment operators are shown below:

1. “=”: This is the simplest assignment operator. This operator is used to assign the value on the right to the variable on the left. Example:

2. “+=” : This operator is combination of ‘+’ and ‘=’ operators. This operator first adds the current value of the variable on left to the value on the right and then assigns the result to the variable on the left. Example:

If initially value stored in a is 5. Then (a += 6) = 11.

3. “-=” This operator is combination of ‘-‘ and ‘=’ operators. This operator first subtracts the value on the right from the current value of the variable on left and then assigns the result to the variable on the left. Example:

If initially value stored in a is 8. Then (a -= 6) = 2.

4. “*=” This operator is combination of ‘*’ and ‘=’ operators. This operator first multiplies the current value of the variable on left to the value on the right and then assigns the result to the variable on the left. Example:

If initially value stored in a is 5. Then (a *= 6) = 30.

5. “/=” This operator is combination of ‘/’ and ‘=’ operators. This operator first divides the current value of the variable on left by the value on the right and then assigns the result to the variable on the left. Example:

If initially value stored in a is 6. Then (a /= 2) = 3.

Below example illustrates the various Assignment Operators:

Please Login to comment...

Similar reads.

• C-Operators
• cpp-operator

Improve your Coding Skills with Practice

What kind of Experience do you want to share?

• C++ Overview
• C++ Environment Setup
• C++ Basic Syntax
• C++ Comments
• C++ Data Types
• C++ Variable Types
• C++ Variable Scope
• C++ Constants/Literals
• C++ Modifier Types
• C++ Storage Classes
• C++ Operators
• C++ Loop Types
• C++ Decision Making
• C++ Functions
• C++ Numbers
• C++ Strings
• C++ Pointers
• C++ References
• C++ Date & Time
• C++ Basic Input/Output
• C++ Data Structures
• C++ Object Oriented
• C++ Classes & Objects
• C++ Inheritance
• C++ Overloading
• C++ Polymorphism
• C++ Abstraction
• C++ Encapsulation
• C++ Interfaces
• C++ Advanced
• C++ Files and Streams
• C++ Exception Handling
• C++ Dynamic Memory
• C++ Namespaces
• C++ Templates
• C++ Preprocessor
• C++ Signal Handling
• C++ Multithreading
• C++ Web Programming
• C++ Useful Resources
• C++ Questions and Answers
• C++ Quick Guide
• C++ Cheat Sheet
• C++ - Advanced Concepts
• C++ STL Tutorial
• C++ Standard Library
• C++ Discussion
• Selected Reading
• UPSC IAS Exams Notes
• Developer's Best Practices
• Questions and Answers
• Effective Resume Writing
• HR Interview Questions
• Computer Glossary

Assignment Operators Overloading in C++

You can overload the assignment operator (=) just as you can other operators and it can be used to create an object just like the copy constructor.

Following example explains how an assignment operator can be overloaded.

When the above code is compiled and executed, it produces the following result −

operator overloading

Customizes the C++ operators for operands of user-defined types.

Overloaded operators are functions with special function names:

Overloaded operators

When an operator appears in an expression , and at least one of its operands has a class type or an enumeration type , then overload resolution is used to determine the user-defined function to be called among all the functions whose signatures match the following:

Note: for overloading user-defined conversion functions , user-defined literals , allocation and deallocation see their respective articles.

Overloaded operators (but not the built-in operators) can be called using function notation:

Restrictions

• The operators :: (scope resolution), . (member access), .* (member access through pointer to member), and ?: (ternary conditional) cannot be overloaded.
• New operators such as ** , <> , or &| cannot be created.
• The overloads of operators && and || lose short-circuit evaluation.
• The overload of operator -> must either return a raw pointer, or return an object (by reference or by value) for which operator -> is in turn overloaded.
• It is not possible to change the precedence, grouping, or number of operands of operators.

Canonical implementations

Other than the restrictions above, the language puts no other constraints on what the overloaded operators do, or on the return type (it does not participate in overload resolution), but in general, overloaded operators are expected to behave as similar as possible to the built-in operators: operator + is expected to add, rather than multiply its arguments, operator = is expected to assign, etc. The related operators are expected to behave similarly ( operator + and operator + = do the same addition-like operation). The return types are limited by the expressions in which the operator is expected to be used: for example, assignment operators return by reference to make it possible to write a = b = c = d , because the built-in operators allow that.

Commonly overloaded operators have the following typical, canonical forms: [1]

Assignment operator

The assignment operator ( operator = ) has special properties: see copy assignment and move assignment for details.

The canonical copy-assignment operator is expected to perform no action on self-assignment , and to return the lhs by reference:

The canonical move assignment is expected to leave the moved-from object in valid state (that is, a state with class invariants intact), and either do nothing or at least leave the object in a valid state on self-assignment, and return the lhs by reference to non-const, and be noexcept:

In those situations where copy assignment cannot benefit from resource reuse (it does not manage a heap-allocated array and does not have a (possibly transitive) member that does, such as a member std::vector or std::string ), there is a popular convenient shorthand: the copy-and-swap assignment operator, which takes its parameter by value (thus working as both copy- and move-assignment depending on the value category of the argument), swaps with the parameter, and lets the destructor clean it up.

This form automatically provides strong exception guarantee , but prohibits resource reuse.

Stream extraction and insertion

The overloads of operator>> and operator<< that take a std:: istream & or std:: ostream & as the left hand argument are known as insertion and extraction operators. Since they take the user-defined type as the right argument ( b in a@b ), they must be implemented as non-members.

These operators are sometimes implemented as friend functions .

Function call operator

When a user-defined class overloads the function call operator, operator ( ) , it becomes a FunctionObject type. Many standard algorithms, from std:: sort to std:: accumulate accept objects of such types to customize behavior. There are no particularly notable canonical forms of operator ( ) , but to illustrate the usage

Increment and decrement

When the postfix increment and decrement appear in an expression, the corresponding user-defined function ( operator ++ or operator -- ) is called with an integer argument 0 . Typically, it is implemented as T operator ++ ( int ) , where the argument is ignored. The postfix increment and decrement operator is usually implemented in terms of the prefix version:

Although canonical form of pre-increment/pre-decrement returns a reference, as with any operator overload, the return type is user-defined; for example the overloads of these operators for std::atomic return by value.

Binary arithmetic operators

Binary operators are typically implemented as non-members to maintain symmetry (for example, when adding a complex number and an integer, if operator+ is a member function of the complex type, then only complex + integer would compile, and not integer + complex ). Since for every binary arithmetic operator there exists a corresponding compound assignment operator, canonical forms of binary operators are implemented in terms of their compound assignments:

Relational operators

Standard algorithms such as std:: sort and containers such as std:: set expect operator < to be defined, by default, for the user-provided types, and expect it to implement strict weak ordering (thus satisfying the Compare requirements). An idiomatic way to implement strict weak ordering for a structure is to use lexicographical comparison provided by std::tie :

Typically, once operator < is provided, the other relational operators are implemented in terms of operator < .

Likewise, the inequality operator is typically implemented in terms of operator == :

When three-way comparison (such as std::memcmp or std::string::compare ) is provided, all six relational operators may be expressed through that:

Array subscript operator

User-defined classes that provide array-like access that allows both reading and writing typically define two overloads for operator [ ] : const and non-const variants:

If the value type is known to be a built-in type, the const variant should return by value.

Where direct access to the elements of the container is not wanted or not possible or distinguishing between lvalue c [ i ] = v ; and rvalue v = c [ i ] ; usage, operator[] may return a proxy. see for example std::bitset::operator[] .

To provide multidimensional array access semantics, e.g. to implement a 3D array access a [ i ] [ j ] [ k ] = x ; , operator[] has to return a reference to a 2D plane, which has to have its own operator[] which returns a reference to a 1D row, which has to have operator[] which returns a reference to the element. To avoid this complexity, some libraries opt for overloading operator ( ) instead, so that 3D access expressions have the Fortran-like syntax a ( i, j, k ) = x ;

Bitwise arithmetic operators

User-defined classes and enumerations that implement the requirements of BitmaskType are required to overload the bitwise arithmetic operators operator & , operator | , operator ^ , operator~ , operator & = , operator | = , and operator ^ = , and may optionally overload the shift operators operator << operator >> , operator >>= , and operator <<= . The canonical implementations usually follow the pattern for binary arithmetic operators described above.

Boolean negation operator

The operator operator ! is commonly overloaded by the user-defined classes that are intended to be used in boolean contexts. Such classes also provide a user-defined conversion function explicit operator bool ( ) (see std::basic_ios for the standard library example), and the expected behavior of operator ! is to return the value opposite of operator bool .

Rarely overloaded operators

The following operators are rarely overloaded:

• The address-of operator, operator & . If the unary & is applied to an lvalue of incomplete type and the complete type declares an overloaded operator & , the behavior is undefined (until C++11) it is unspecified whether the operator has the built-in meaning or the operator function is called (since C++11) . Because this operator may be overloaded, generic libraries use std::addressof to obtain addresses of objects of user-defined types. The best known example of a canonical overloaded operator& is the Microsoft class CComPtr . An example of its use in EDSL can be found in boost.spirit .
• The boolean logic operators, operator && and operator || . Unlike the built-in versions, the overloads cannot implement short-circuit evaluation. Also unlike the built-in versions, they do not sequence their left operand before the right one. (until C++17) In the standard library, these operators are only overloaded for std::valarray .
• The comma operator, operator, . Unlike the built-in version, the overloads do not sequence their left operand before the right one. (until C++17) Because this operator may be overloaded, generic libraries use expressions such as a, void ( ) ,b instead of a,b to sequence execution of expressions of user-defined types. The boost library uses operator, in boost.assign , boost.spirit , and other libraries. The database access library SOCI also overloads operator, .
• The member access through pointer to member operator - > * . There are no specific downsides to overloading this operator, but it is rarely used in practice. It was suggested that it could be part of smart pointer interface , and in fact is used in that capacity by actors in boost.phoenix . It is more common in EDSLs such as cpp.react .

Defect reports

The following behavior-changing defect reports were applied retroactively to previously published C++ standards.

• Operator precedence
• Alternative operator syntax

• ↑ Operator Overloading on StackOverflow C++ FAQ

cppreference.com

Copy assignment operator.

A copy assignment operator is a non-template non-static member function with the name operator = that can be called with an argument of the same class type and copies the content of the argument without mutating the argument.

[ edit ] Syntax

For the formal copy assignment operator syntax, see function declaration . The syntax list below only demonstrates a subset of all valid copy assignment operator syntaxes.

[ edit ] Explanation

The copy assignment operator is called whenever selected by overload resolution , e.g. when an object appears on the left side of an assignment expression.

[ edit ] Implicitly-declared copy assignment operator

If no user-defined copy assignment operators are provided for a class type, the compiler will always declare one as an inline public member of the class. This implicitly-declared copy assignment operator has the form T & T :: operator = ( const T & ) if all of the following is true:

• each direct base B of T has a copy assignment operator whose parameters are B or const B & or const volatile B & ;
• each non-static data member M of T of class type or array of class type has a copy assignment operator whose parameters are M or const M & or const volatile M & .

Otherwise the implicitly-declared copy assignment operator is declared as T & T :: operator = ( T & ) .

Due to these rules, the implicitly-declared copy assignment operator cannot bind to a volatile lvalue argument.

A class can have multiple copy assignment operators, e.g. both T & T :: operator = ( T & ) and T & T :: operator = ( T ) . If some user-defined copy assignment operators are present, the user may still force the generation of the implicitly declared copy assignment operator with the keyword default . (since C++11)

The implicitly-declared (or defaulted on its first declaration) copy assignment operator has an exception specification as described in dynamic exception specification (until C++17) noexcept specification (since C++17)

Because the copy assignment operator is always declared for any class, the base class assignment operator is always hidden. If a using-declaration is used to bring in the assignment operator from the base class, and its argument type could be the same as the argument type of the implicit assignment operator of the derived class, the using-declaration is also hidden by the implicit declaration.

[ edit ] Implicitly-defined copy assignment operator

If the implicitly-declared copy assignment operator is neither deleted nor trivial, it is defined (that is, a function body is generated and compiled) by the compiler if odr-used or needed for constant evaluation (since C++14) . For union types, the implicitly-defined copy assignment copies the object representation (as by std::memmove ). For non-union class types, the operator performs member-wise copy assignment of the object's direct bases and non-static data members, in their initialization order, using built-in assignment for the scalars, memberwise copy-assignment for arrays, and copy assignment operator for class types (called non-virtually).

[ edit ] Deleted copy assignment operator

An implicitly-declared or explicitly-defaulted (since C++11) copy assignment operator for class T is undefined (until C++11) defined as deleted (since C++11) if any of the following conditions is satisfied:

• T has a non-static data member of a const-qualified non-class type (or possibly multi-dimensional array thereof).
• T has a non-static data member of a reference type.
• T has a potentially constructed subobject of class type M (or possibly multi-dimensional array thereof) such that the overload resolution as applied to find M 's copy assignment operator
• does not result in a usable candidate, or
• in the case of the subobject being a variant member , selects a non-trivial function.

[ edit ] Trivial copy assignment operator

The copy assignment operator for class T is trivial if all of the following is true:

• it is not user-provided (meaning, it is implicitly-defined or defaulted);
• T has no virtual member functions;
• T has no virtual base classes;
• the copy assignment operator selected for every direct base of T is trivial;
• the copy assignment operator selected for every non-static class type (or array of class type) member of T is trivial.

A trivial copy assignment operator makes a copy of the object representation as if by std::memmove . All data types compatible with the C language (POD types) are trivially copy-assignable.

[ edit ] Eligible copy assignment operator

Triviality of eligible copy assignment operators determines whether the class is a trivially copyable type .

[ edit ] Notes

If both copy and move assignment operators are provided, overload resolution selects the move assignment if the argument is an rvalue (either a prvalue such as a nameless temporary or an xvalue such as the result of std::move ), and selects the copy assignment if the argument is an lvalue (named object or a function/operator returning lvalue reference). If only the copy assignment is provided, all argument categories select it (as long as it takes its argument by value or as reference to const, since rvalues can bind to const references), which makes copy assignment the fallback for move assignment, when move is unavailable.

It is unspecified whether virtual base class subobjects that are accessible through more than one path in the inheritance lattice, are assigned more than once by the implicitly-defined copy assignment operator (same applies to move assignment ).

See assignment operator overloading for additional detail on the expected behavior of a user-defined copy-assignment operator.

[ edit ] Example

[ edit ] defect reports.

The following behavior-changing defect reports were applied retroactively to previously published C++ standards.

[ edit ] See also

• converting constructor
• copy constructor
• copy elision
• default constructor
• aggregate initialization
• constant initialization
• copy initialization
• default initialization
• direct initialization
• initializer list
• list initialization
• reference initialization
• value initialization
• zero initialization
• move assignment
• move constructor
• Recent changes
• Offline version
• What links here
• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Printable version
• Permanent link
• Page information
• In other languages
• This page was last modified on 2 February 2024, at 16:13.
• Privacy policy
• About cppreference.com
• Disclaimers

How to Implement Assignment Operator Overloading in C++

• How to Implement Assignment Operator …

This article will explain several methods of how to implement assignment operator overloading in C++.

Use copy-assignment operator to Implement Overloaded Assignment Operator in C++

C++ provides the feature to overload operators, a common way to call custom functions when a built-in operator is called on specific classes. These functions should have a special name starting with operator followed by the specific operator symbol itself. E.g., a custom assignment operator can be implemented with the function named operator= . Assignment operator generally should return a reference to its left-hand operand. Note that if the user does not explicitly define the copy assignment operator, the compiler generates one automatically. The generated version is quite capable when the class does not contain any data members manually allocated on the heap memory. It can even handle the array members by assigning each element to the corresponding object members. Although, it has shortcomings when dealing with dynamic memory data members, as shown in the following example code.

The above code defines only copy-constructor explicitly, which results in incorrect behavior when P1 object contents are assigned to the P3 object. Note that the second call to the P1.renamePerson function should not have modified the P3 object’s data members, but it did. The solution to this is to define an overloaded assignment operator i.e., copy-assignment operator. The next code snippet implements the version of the Person class that can copy assign the two objects of the same class correctly. Notice, though, the if statement in the copy-assignment function guarantees that the operator works correctly even when the object is assigned to itself.

Founder of DelftStack.com. Jinku has worked in the robotics and automotive industries for over 8 years. He sharpened his coding skills when he needed to do the automatic testing, data collection from remote servers and report creation from the endurance test. He is from an electrical/electronics engineering background but has expanded his interest to embedded electronics, embedded programming and front-/back-end programming.

Related Article - C++ Class

• How to Initialize Static Variables in C++ Class
• How to Get Class Name in C++
• Point and Line Class in C++
• Class Template Inheritance in C++
• Difference Between Structure and Class in C++
• Wrapper Class in C++

• Stack Overflow for Teams Where developers & technologists share private knowledge with coworkers
• Advertising & Talent Reach devs & technologists worldwide about your product, service or employer brand
• OverflowAI GenAI features for Teams
• OverflowAPI Train & fine-tune LLMs
• Labs The future of collective knowledge sharing
• About the company Visit the blog

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Get early access and see previews of new features.

overloading assignment operator and header file in c++

i want to add a overloaded assignment operator to my object class in c++ but when I do this

and with a header file like this

when compiling I get a compile error that says:

• overloading
• variable-assignment

• You have to declare Cabinet::operator= in your definition of the class in your header file if you intend to define it later on. Also Chemical*** ? Really? –  Nathan Pierson Commented Nov 15, 2021 at 5:33
• First, don't tag this as C , since this is C++. Second, you need a copy constructor to go along with the assignment operator. I suggest you write the copy constructor first. Once you do that, the assignment operator becomes a very simple 5 lines of std::swap calls. –  PaulMcKenzie Commented Nov 15, 2021 at 5:33
• Cabinet& operator=( const Cabinet& right ); -- This is missing from your class. Almost want to close this as a typo. Also, that assignment operator, even if you got this to compile without errors, is highly flawed. So you will jumping out the frying pan and into the fire. –  PaulMcKenzie Commented Nov 15, 2021 at 5:38
• @NathanPierson i am using 2D arrays with objects inside them .( therefore I needed to use them –  PoePew Commented Nov 15, 2021 at 6:15
• Rethink whatever process led you to Chemical*** chemicals; . If it isn't outright wrong, it's... interesting. And interesting processes lead to interesting code and interesting bugs. –  user4581301 Commented Nov 15, 2021 at 6:16

You need to declare the function in your header file so you can define it later on.

Your Answer

Reminder: Answers generated by artificial intelligence tools are not allowed on Stack Overflow. Learn more

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest.

Required, but never shown

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy .

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged c++ header overloading variable-assignment or ask your own question .

• Featured on Meta
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process
• Upcoming initiatives on Stack Overflow and across the Stack Exchange network...

Hot Network Questions

• How do I prepare a longer campaign for mixed-experience players?
• Terminology: A "corollary" to a proof?
• Using Gamma Ray Lasers to Blow Away Interstellar Medium
• Where can I find a switch to alternate connections between two pairs of two wires?
• Is it true that the letter I is pronounced as a consonant when it's the first letter of a syllable?
• Can't get started with Tao Ex 3.6.6 regarding cardinality of power sets.
• What happens after "3.9% APR Financing for 36 Months"?
• What type of outlet is this? and is there anything I can do with basic electrical knowhow to get it up to speed for everyday use?
• What's the purpose of philosophy/knowledge?
• Can we simply remove the log term for loss in policy gradient methods?
• What does "joint-most" exactly mean?
• Has Donald Trump or his campaign explained what his plan is so that "we’ll have it fixed so good you’re not gonna have to vote"?
• Definition of 出元
• Why does the 68000 have Immediate addressing modes for byte-width instructions?
• How to phrase CV when my college didn’t award magna cum laude (in general) while others do?
• How to fix "Google Play is linked to another account" in Bomber Friends?
• Why is this pipe in my garage filled with concrete?
• What to do about chain rubbing on unusually placed chainstay?
• Camera on me and my computer screen all day
• Why doesn't Philip directly answer Jesus' query in John 6:5-7?
• Functional derivative of the integral of a Taylor expansion?
• Does anyone know if Edit Mode's "Make Line" Tool was deleted or moved in Blender 4.2?
• Is the writer or artist liable for a copyright violation?
• Do amateurs still search for supernovae?