Comments on: 9.7 — Overloading the increment and decrement operators http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/ Tue, 07 Feb 2012 12:30:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Dr. HaXX http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-95148 Dr. HaXX Wed, 02 Feb 2011 15:08:04 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-95148 Second example, line 61: increment should be decrement ;) Second example, line 61: increment should be decrement ;)

]]> By: mslade http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-95000 mslade Sat, 04 Dec 2010 02:58:56 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-95000 I was about to note the same error, and my name is also Mark... Coincidence.... or fate? I was about to note the same error, and my name is also Mark… Coincidence…. or fate?

]]> By: Mark http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-88468 Mark Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:09:49 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-88468 First thanks very much for these tutorials. they're cracking. Just a little proofing moment - in the 2nd to last paragraph "Note that this means the return value of the overloaded operator much be a non-reference" should that be a "must" rather than a "much"? Cheers Mark First thanks very much for these tutorials. they’re cracking.

Just a little proofing moment – in the 2nd to last paragraph “Note that this means the return value of the overloaded operator much be a non-reference” should that be a “must” rather than a “much”?

Cheers

Mark

]]> By: Soia http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-66269 Soia Fri, 14 Aug 2009 18:54:24 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-66269 Turns out it wasn't the case at all, what happened was that my operator<< recieved the object parameter as not const. It seems that when you pass the object parameter to the operator<< as const, as it should always be, it solves my problem. Turns out it wasn’t the case at all, what happened was that my operator<< recieved the object parameter as not const. It seems that when you pass the object parameter to the operator<< as const, as it should always be, it solves my problem.

]]> By: Soia http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-66173 Soia Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:26:15 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-66173 I have a question. The way the postfix is implemented... you can't do something like this: <pre> cout << cDigit++ << endl; </pre> And I think it's because the postfix returns a value, and not a reference, whereas the operator<< receives a reference as parameter, and not a value. Any thoughts on this? I wanna be able to print a postfix. Thanks in advance. I have a question.

The way the postfix is implemented… you can’t do something like this:

 cout << cDigit++ << endl;

And I think it’s because the postfix returns a value, and not a reference, whereas the operator<< receives a reference as parameter, and not a value.

Any thoughts on this? I wanna be able to print a postfix.

Thanks in advance.

]]> By: Rom http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-62856 Rom Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:13:03 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-62856 <code>m_nDigit = (m_nDigit + 1) % 10; </code> can be even shorter: <code>m_nDigit = ++m_nDigit % 10; </code> m_nDigit = (m_nDigit + 1) % 10;

can be even shorter:

m_nDigit = ++m_nDigit % 10;

]]> By: Israel http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-61183 Israel Wed, 20 May 2009 09:35:24 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-61183 You can replace this: <pre> // If our number is already at 9, wrap around to 0 if (m_nDigit == 9) m_nDigit = 0; // otherwise just increment to next number else ++m_nDigit; </pre> with: <pre> m_nDigit = (m_nDigit + 1) % 10; </pre> You can replace this:

    // If our number is already at 9, wrap around to 0
    if (m_nDigit == 9)
        m_nDigit = 0;
    // otherwise just increment to next number
    else
        ++m_nDigit;

with:

        m_nDigit = (m_nDigit + 1) % 10;
]]> By: Alex http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-42005 Alex Fri, 06 Feb 2009 08:13:51 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-42005 No, this always points to the instance of the class itself, so in this case this points to the Digit object that contains m_nDigit. That line simply invokes the prefix decrement operator on the same object that the postfix decrement operator was called on. No, this always points to the instance of the class itself, so in this case this points to the Digit object that contains m_nDigit.

That line simply invokes the prefix decrement operator on the same object that the postfix decrement operator was called on.

]]> By: Andrian http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-39608 Andrian Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:53:52 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-39608 <pre> # Digit Digit::operator--(int) # { # // Create a temporary variable with our current digit # Digit cResult(m_nDigit); # # // Use prefix operator to increment this digit # --(*this); // apply operator # # // return temporary result # return cResult; // return saved state # } </pre> The "*this" in this function refers to 'm_nDigit'? # Digit Digit::operator--(int) # { # // Create a temporary variable with our current digit # Digit cResult(m_nDigit); # # // Use prefix operator to increment this digit # --(*this); // apply operator # # // return temporary result # return cResult; // return saved state # }

The “*this” in this function refers to ‘m_nDigit’?

]]> By: Alex http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-increment-and-decrement-operators/comment-page-1/#comment-32310 Alex Tue, 18 Nov 2008 03:47:24 +0000 http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/97-overloading-the-and-operators/#comment-32310 There's no reason at all -- In fact, it's pretty much useless to do. I've updated the example to remove the extraneous const values. There’s no reason at all — In fact, it’s pretty much useless to do. I’ve updated the example to remove the extraneous const values.

]]>