Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-pcd!hplsla!jima
From: jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: More Questions on operator=
Message-ID: <6590128@hplsla.HP.COM>
Date: 19 May 89 19:40:16 GMT
References: <925@ethz.UUCP>
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Lines: 5

As per Marti's example, I don't understand why the language
forces redefinition of op= when a derived class doesn't have
any new members?

Can anyone explain the logic in this?