What's wrong Overloading []

[SinusX]

Hello
My gcc copiler write this
TypEle& Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]
' and `
TypEle Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]'
cannot be overloaded

where TypEle is tempalte type, Tablica is table object.

TypEle Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]
I use for Tablica<int> tab1; int X;
X = tab1[23] and this work great but when I added
TypEle& Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]
for tab[1] = X it doen't work. With second operator i can't compile. How
should i corect this ??

[Victor Bazarov]

SinusX wrote:

My gcc copiler write this
TypEle& Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]
' and `
TypEle Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]'
cannot be overloaded

where TypEle is tempalte type, Tablica is table object.

TypEle Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]
I use for Tablica<int> tab1; int X;
X = tab1[23] and this work great but when I added
TypEle& Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) [with TypEle = int]
for tab[1] = X it doen't work. With second operator i can't compile. How
should i corect this ??

The compiler complains because the difference between the two functions is
only in the return value type. You probably mean to make the second one
'const':

TypEle Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int) const;

while leaving the first one as is:

TypEle& Tablica<TypEle>::operator[](unsigned int);

See the difference? The one that returns a reference should not be const,
most likely.

Victor