From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-07 10:17:07
> Uh, where is it?
It was posted to the boost-users list. Implementation is utterly trivial
anyway.
> There are a number of useful things to go with complex. Here is
> another.
>
> It is common to need the scalar type that corresponds to a numeric
> type, whether that type is complex or scalar. For example, the type
> returned by abs. Implementation is pretty trivial:
Interesting, and good point.
OK, is there any objection to is_complex being added, what about Neal's
trait (and what to call it if it is added, "scalar" maybe?).
John.