From 1872633949644288720 X-Google-Thread: 7894ca11fe,421cd8b98acf7c5 X-Google-Attributes: gid7894ca11fe,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!news2.glorb.com!news.alt.net!frodo.cs.rpi.edu!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Kr= FCgler?= Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Why there are both complex::real and std::real? Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:26:53 CST Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 27 Sender: cppmods@cs.rpi.edu Approved: austern@google.com Message-ID: References: <210ca399-bea2-47bf-b614-f4cef8fe25fd@k26g2000vbp.googlegroups.com> <9f639ca8-87a5-43fe-923f-c62a4bea7cfa@j4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: netlab.cs.rpi.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 To: (Usenet) Return-Path: X-Original-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:14:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Submission-Address: std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.std.c++:1588 On 27 Okt., 20:14, Saeed Amrollahi wrote: > On Oct 27, 12:26 am, Daniel Kr�gler > wrote: > So, the free functions real() and imag() are there just for C/C++ > compatibility. Yes, exactly. > For new abstractions let say run-time rational numbers, we don't need > to such compatibility, because there is no rational number related functions > in C, then we don't have to worry about these things. Right? This is correct. HTH & Greetings from Bremen, Daniel Kr�gler -- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]