Fixing the imaginary/complex mess

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 6/13/11 6:36 AM, Robert Clipsham wrote:
> I seemed to think the plan for complex numbers was to do what happened
> with associative arrays, that is, keep the language syntax, but have the
> feature implemented in the library. Is this not the case?

No, the current vision is to completely replace complex with library 
artifacts. Walter wants to keep the "i" postfix as a hack, but I think 
that's completely unnecessary.

A complex() convenience function should be useful. If anyone has the 
time, please create a pull request. It should never automatically create 
Complex with an integral type, as bearophile mentioned. For the rare 
cases where complex is needed with integrals, it should be fine to use 
Complex!int etc. directly.


Andrei