Talk:Arithmetic/Complex: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted
No edit summary
(Undo revision 14160 by IanOsgood (Talk) sorry, overwrote a previous answer!)
Line 4: Line 4:
:I did some looking; there are complex built-in types in the C99 standard, with defined implicit casts up and down to the other numeric primitives. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 10:36, 11 March 2008 (MDT)
:I did some looking; there are complex built-in types in the C99 standard, with defined implicit casts up and down to the other numeric primitives. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 10:36, 11 March 2008 (MDT)
::How could an implicit cast from a complex type to a floating point or integer type result in a valid value? Simple integers and floats cannot represent both the real and imaginary parts of the complex number.--[[User:Waldorf|Waldorf]] 17:36, 11 March 2008 (MDT)
::How could an implicit cast from a complex type to a floating point or integer type result in a valid value? Simple integers and floats cannot represent both the real and imaginary parts of the complex number.--[[User:Waldorf|Waldorf]] 17:36, 11 March 2008 (MDT)
:: Same way (int)1.5 isn't valid. A down-cast would strip the imaginary part. Implicit up-casts are the the more useful case anyway, allowing scalar/complex arithmetic. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 10:57, 12 March 2008 (MDT)
:::The code example only uses conversions from real types to complex types; but complex types can be converted to real types by discarding the imaginary part. --[[User:Spoon!|Spoon!]] 18:21, 11 March 2008 (MDT)
Retrieved from "https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Talk:Arithmetic/Complex"