Couldn't agree more with Joel there. I have 20+ years experience design and coding, and the first thing I thought of when I saw that was: It won't even compile.
I made that assumption because I try to avoid overloads that differ by only a single datatype, and in looking at the code didn't even pick up on the int/double difference; I assumed there needed to be a new operator to allow a redefinition in B.
In point of fact I had used a library a fellow programmer created for handling some text file generation that was a bit confusing because one of the methods had 8 different overloads and two of them differed only by datatype on the last argument. One was string and one was char. The likelihood that the value needed for the string version of the parameter was one character long was pretty good so hopefully you can see where this is headed. We had a devil of a time debugging problems because the consumer of the library inadvertently triggered the wrong call because of quoting differences, single versus double.
Moral of the story, be grateful that the candidate doesn't know the answer because it may indicate good coding habits.
