Operator overloading outside class

C++Operator Overloading

C++ Problem Overview


There are two ways to overload operators for a C++ class:

Inside class
class Vector2
{
public:
    float x, y ;
    
    Vector2 operator+( const Vector2 & other )
    {
        Vector2 ans ;
        ans.x = x + other.x ;
        ans.y = y + other.y ;
        return ans ;
    }
} ;
Outside class
class Vector2
{
public:
    float x, y ;
} ;

Vector2 operator+( const Vector2& v1, const Vector2& v2 )
{
    Vector2 ans ;
    ans.x = v1.x + v2.x ;
    ans.y = v1.y + v2.y ;
    return ans ;
}

(Apparently in C# you can only use the "outside class" method.)

In C++, which way is more correct? Which is preferable?

C++ Solutions


Solution 1 - C++

The basic question is "Do you want conversions to be performed on the left-hand side parameter of an operator?". If yes, use a free function. If no, use a class member.

For example, for operator+() for strings, we want conversions to be performed so we can say things like:

string a = "bar";
string b = "foo" + a;

where a conversion is performed to turn the char * "foo" into an std::string. So, we make operator+() for strings into a free function.

Solution 2 - C++

First: the two different ways are really "overload as a member" and "overload as a non-member", and the latter has two different ways to write it (as-friend-inside class definition and outside class definition). Calling them "inside class" and "outside class" is going to confuse you.


Overloads for +=, +, -=, -, etc. have a special pattern:

struct Vector2 {
  float x, y;
  Vector2& operator+=(Vector2 const& other) {
    x += other.x;
    y += other.y;
    return *this;
  }
  Vector2& operator-=(Vector2 const& other) {
    x -= other.x;
    y -= other.y;
    return *this;
  }
};
Vector2 operator+(Vector2 a, Vector2 const& b) {
  // note 'a' is passed by value and thus copied
  a += b;
  return a;
}
Vector2 operator-(Vector2 a, Vector2 const& b) { return a -= b; } // compact

This pattern allows the conversions mentioned in the other answers for the LHS argument while simplifying the implementation considerably. (Either member or non-member allows conversions for the RHS when it's passed either as a const& or by value, as it should be.) Of course, this only applies when you do actually want to overload both += and +, -= and -, etc., but that is still common.


Additionally, you sometimes want to declare your non-member op+, etc. as friends within the class definition using the Barton-Nackman trick, because due to quirks of templates and overloading, it may not be found otherwise.

Solution 3 - C++

There is an excellent discussion of this issue in Meyer's Effective C++: Item 24 is "Declare non-member functions when type conversions should apply to all parameters" and Item 46 is "Define non-member functions inside templates when type conversions are desired".

Attributions

All content for this solution is sourced from the original question on Stackoverflow.

The content on this page is licensed under the Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license.

Content TypeOriginal AuthorOriginal Content on Stackoverflow
QuestionboboboboView Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - C++anonView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - C++Roger PateView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - C++FrancescoView Answer on Stackoverflow