Thorsten Ottosen-3 wrote:
Den 18-11-2011 12:17, Vicente Botet skrev:
Thorsten Ottosen-3 wrote:
Den 17-11-2011 12:42, Vicente Botet skrev:
Matthieu Schaller wrote:
Dear all,
Many years ago I proposed
http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2005/n1869.html
Maybe it can be of interest.
How this proposal was received?
As not worth doing. But I couldn't show examples of algorithms that where faster than without it.
I agree that without a clear gain in performances, it will be difficult to justify the addition. This is secondary, I see in http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2004/n1612.pdf that you proposed a variable i so that complex_t z = 4.2 + 3.0*i; is well formed. This variable was removed from n1869, isn't it? While I like the trick, it could break a lot of code. Could the addition of a user literal allow to use it as complex_t z = 4.2 + 3.0i; Of course, when we have a double and we want an imaginary, 'i' could not be used anymore, and 1i will be necessary, which is unfortunate double d; complex_t z = 4.2 + d*1i; Just some impressions, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Determining-interest-Pure-imaginary-numbe... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.