No more implicit conversion real->complex?!

[Walter Bright]

"Norbert Nemec" <Norbert at Nemec-online.de> wrote in message 
news:dvn3vm$qpu$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>I just notice that as of D 0.150, implicit conversion from
> real/imaginary to complex does not work any more. I could not make out
> the message containing the suggestion by Don Clugston, so I'm not sure
> about the rationale.
>
> In any case: if this conversion does not work implicitely any more, I
> wonder whether I understand the rule which conversions do? real->complex
> is possible without ambiguities or loss of information. Why not make it
> implicit?
>
> I think this is an important issue: in numerics, mixing of real and
> complex values happens all the time, therefore it should be as simple as
> possible.

The issue Don brought up was the problem of overload resolution between 
functions taking real args and those taking complex args.