overloading the "-" operator

The implementation code for this overload will run, but it gives me an error when I actually try to use it in an application.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
// FILE: bag.cxx
// CLASS IMPLEMENTED: bag (see bag.h for documentation)
// INVARIANT for the bag class:
//   1. The number of items in the bag is in the member variable used;
//   2. For an empty bag, we do not care what is stored in any of data; for a
//      non-empty bag the items in the bag are stored in data[0] through
//      data[used-1], and we don't care what's in the rest of data.

#include <algorithm> // Provides copy function
#include <cassert>   // Provides assert function
#include "bag.h"
using namespace std;

//const bag::size_type bag::CAPACITY;
//had to comment this out to get it to run for some reason

bag::size_type bag::erase(const value_type& target)
{
	size_type index = 0;
	size_type many_removed = 0;

	while (index < used)
	{
		if (data[index] == target)
		{
			--used;
			data[index] = data[used];
			++many_removed;
		}
		else
			++index;
	}

	return many_removed;
}

bool bag::erase_one(const value_type& target)
{
	size_type index; // The location of target in the data array    

	// First, set index to the location of target in the data array,
	// which could be as small as 0 or as large as used-1. If target is not
	// in the array, then index will be set equal to used.
	index = 0; 
	while ((index < used) && (data[index] != target))
		++index;

	if (index == used)
		return false; // target isn’t in the bag, so no work to do.

	// When execution reaches here, target is in the bag at data[index].
	// So, reduce used by 1 and copy the last item onto data[index].
	--used;
	data[index] = data[used];    
	return true;
}

void bag::insert(const value_type& entry)
// Library facilities used: cassert
{   
	assert(size( ) < CAPACITY);

	data[used] = entry;
	++used;
}

void bag::operator +=(const bag& addend)
// Library facilities used: algorithm, cassert
{
	assert(size( ) + addend.size( ) <= CAPACITY);

	copy(addend.data, addend.data + addend.used, data + used);
	used += addend.used;
}

bag::size_type bag::count(const value_type& target) const
{
	size_type answer;
	size_type i;

	answer = 0;
	for (i = 0; i < used; ++i)
		if (target == data[i])
			++answer;
	return answer;
}

bag::value_type bag::index_value(const value_type&target_index) const
//returns data[target_index]
{
	int index = target_index;

	return data[index];
}

bag::value_type bag::bag_size() const
//returns the number of items in bag
{
	return used;
}



bag operator +(const bag& b1, const bag& b2)
// Library facilities used: cassert
{
	bag answer;

	assert(b1.size( ) + b2.size( ) <= bag::CAPACITY);

	answer += b1; 
	answer += b2;
	return answer;
}

bag operator -(bag&b1, const bag& b2)
//eliminates the numbers in bag2 from bag1
{
	int num;
	
	for(int index=0; index<b2.bag_size(); index++)
	{
		num = b2.index_value(index);
		b1.erase_one(num);
	}
	
	return b1;
}


My professor gave us most of this file prewritten, but I wrote the index_vale, bag_size, and overload - functions.

When I try to run something like this:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
int main( )
{
	bag b1;
	bag b2;

	get_nums(b1);
	get_nums(b2);
  
        b1 = b1-b2;


I get the following error:
error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "class bag __cdecl operator-(class bag const &,class bag const &)
I found that the implementation of the overload didnt match the prototype...doh!
Your - is overloaded incorrectly.

- should not modify the left value. For example:

1
2
3
4
int foo = 5;
int bar = 3;

int baz = foo - bar; // this shouldn't change foo, it should only change baz 


Since your code for - is modifying b1, it does not behave as one would expect.


Also, this seems like a very bad use of overloaded operators. What you're having the operators do is not intuitive at all.
Last edited on
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.