I hope you can clear this confusion.
The situation is I have a base class in which I’ve implemented operator overloads for +, -, *, /, etc. These, of course are static methods. I have xml commented them all.
I have a derived class that does not re-implement these overloads. Nevertheless, instances of this derived class obey the base class operator overloads quite happily.
I produce the help file documentation with Sandcastle Help File Builder. As expected, the overloaded operators are listed as members of the base class. However, the overloads are not included in the derived class member documentation.
I realise that this is because no static members from the base class are listed as derived class members. However, a casual browser of the documentation might conclude that the derived class does not obey any operator overloads.
Of course, I can always include a link to the base class documentation from within the derived class documentation. However, is there a better generally accepted way of improving the discoverability of these operator overloads? Or, is there something
I’m not understanding here?