Operator overloading - Am I reading peoples minds here?

Question

Fill in the blanks to declare a class ''Sally'', with two constructors, one default constructor (without parameters), and a constructor with one integer parameter.

_____ Sally
{
_____:
Sally();
Sally(___);
}

This may be a stupid question, but am I guessing someone's name for the integer parameter here? If so, would someone be so kind as to give me the name so that I can continue this lesson.

Answer 1

Class
Public
Int

Thats the answer in order

Answer 2

_class____ Sally
{
_public____:
Sally();
Sally(_int__);
}

Answer 3

The "name" is int.

Answer 4

whats funny...tried that a few times and say its wrong...was the first thing I tried. Thank you for answering that stupid question lol.

Answer 5

when defining a method with argument (in .h) there is no need to name the arguments.
Just saying the type and order is enough.
And you should name it in declaration (in .cpp).

Answer 6

Drag and drop from the options below to define an overloaded + operator for the class ''Test''.

Answer:
Test Test:: operator+
(Test obj) {
Test
newObj;
newObj.mem =
mem +
obj.mem;
return newObj;
}

Answer 7

class
public
int