On 20 April 2010 11:06, Lars Tandle Kyllingstad <[email protected]> wrote: > Does Complex!BigInt (or Complex!int, for that matter) *ever* make sense? I > mean, yes, it *sounds* cool, and I'm normally against introducing gratuitous > constraints on functionality, but in this case I think I prefer restricting > T to real number types. > > Have in mind that not only will one have to disable (or introduce special > cases for) abs() and arg(), but also some of the operations, in particular > division and exponentiation. > > It all sounds like more work, more maintenance, more complex code (hur hur), > for very little or no benefit.
I agree. Mathematically, complex integers are a fundamentally different type (they are Gaussian integers, and have some interesting properties which general complex numbers don't have, for example, they can be primes) . However, Complex!BigFloat will make sense. It's also possible to imagine using a fixed-point type. So eventually isFloatingPoint!T might change to a slightly more general function. But I don't think we should worry about that for now. _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
