std.complex

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>]

On Thursday, 2 January 2014 at 11:37:22 UTC, Lars T. Kyllingstad 
wrote:
> I don't think we should worry too much about standards 
> compliance. A library Complex type is quite different from a 
> hardware floating-point type.

Are you sure?

Sometimes you need to translate an algorithm, you don't 
understand the inner workings of, from a codebase/cookbook. If 
std.complex differs from the most used c++/fortran 
implementations people will be confused, and you also end up 
having (machine translated) algorithm libraries each supplying 
their own complex type. Use 3 different libraries and you have to 
deal with 3 different complex types.

Floating point is rather sensitive to reordering of instructions, 
so I'd say you'll be better off mirroring one of the major 
existing implementations, otherwise accumulated discrepancies 
will be blamed on the language... A new tool that produce the 
same results as the old proven dinosaur tool look trustworthy. It 
makes you think that the conversion of your algorithms to the new 
tool was a success.