Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:29:15 -0600, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/13/10 6:11 AM, bearophile wrote:
Andrei:
http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
I have a small question. At page 34 of the slides it says:
- Built-in complex types are being replaced by library types
Are complex types totally replaced, or is the complex literals syntax
(like 10+10i) kept? Keeping those literals may be good.
Walter wants to keep complex literals. I strongly believe they are
completely useless.
I agree with this. It would be interesting to know how often people
actually write complex literals. I suspect it is *very* rare.
And how would it work, anyway? Should we be required to import
std.complex to use complex literals?
In my opinion, when the built-in complex types are deprecated, the
literals should go as well.
-Lars
Agreed. I've just looked through some code that I thought used them
extensively, but found only two complex literals: 1i (dozens of
instances) and 2i (one instance).
