digitalmars.D - couldn't we keep complex number literals?
- Trass3r (9/9) Jul 26 2010 I'm not completely sure how AAs are implemented now, but I think I read ...
- bearophile (6/7) Jul 26 2010 I have proposed this idea lot of time ago (and I was not the only one), ...
- Don (2/13) Jul 26 2010 I believe that is the plan.
I'm not completely sure how AAs are implemented now, but I think I read it's somewhat outsourced to druntime. At least there's that struct AssociativeArray(Key, Value) there. Couldn't we do something similar with complex numbers? Like moving the struct Complex(T) implementation that currently resides in std.complex to the runtime, removing the types (creal etc.), adding them as aliases there and providing some slight syntactic sugar so that complex number literals 5 + 3i are mapped onto a Complex instance? I think that would be an ideal solution, wouldn't it?
Jul 26 2010
Trass3r:Couldn't we do something similar with complex numbers?I have proposed this idea lot of time ago (and I was not the only one), but I don't know what Walter thinks about it. I think he thinks that complex literals are not so important in D (despite D is a designed for numerical computing too). I suggested a similar solution for multi-precision integers too: bint i = 1_234_567_890_123_456_789_012_345_678_901_234_567_890; Bye, bearophile
Jul 26 2010
Trass3r wrote:I'm not completely sure how AAs are implemented now, but I think I read it's somewhat outsourced to druntime. At least there's that struct AssociativeArray(Key, Value) there. Couldn't we do something similar with complex numbers? Like moving the struct Complex(T) implementation that currently resides in std.complex to the runtime, removing the types (creal etc.), adding them as aliases there and providing some slight syntactic sugar so that complex number literals 5 + 3i are mapped onto a Complex instance? I think that would be an ideal solution, wouldn't it?I believe that is the plan.
Jul 26 2010