Complex number functions for std.math

[Georg Wrede]

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> I had a similar suggestion, but the other way around... Keep the
> current type names, and added the bitsizenames as aliases instead.

Ehh, if I understand this correctly, this would be the opposite from:

Define "bitsizenames" as the ultimate "Genuine Types", and only alias 
them to the "usually used" types.


This "opposite" is what I have a problem with. I start seeing ghosts in 
the bedroom as soon as somebody tries to define "reality" with a set of 
incongruent "colloquial" names, and only then -- and as defined by them, 
define the "reality" types.

I hope I've seriously misunderstood the above post.