I have used the following code for assignment operator overloading:
SimpleCircle SimpleCircle::operator=(const SimpleCircle & rhs)
{
if(this == &rhs)
return *this;
itsRadius = rhs.getRadius();
return *this;
}
My Copy Constructor is this:
SimpleCircle::SimpleCircle(const SimpleCircle & rhs)
{
itsRadius = rhs.getRadius();
}
In the above operator overloading code, copy constructor is called as there is a new object is being created; hence I used the below code:
SimpleCircle & SimpleCircle::operator=(const SimpleCircle & rhs)
{
if(this == &rhs)
return *this;
itsRadius = rhs.getRadius();
return *this;
}
Its working perfectly and the copy constructor problem is avoided, but is there any unknown issues (to me) regarding this ?
There are no problems with the second version of the assignment operator. In fact, that is the standard way for an assignment operator.
Edit: Note that I am referring to the return type of the assignment operator, not to the implementation itself. As has been pointed out in comments, the implementation itself is another issue. See here.