Je***********@physik.fu-berlin.de wrote:

gc <gu**********@yahoo.com> wrote: Hi,

Why didn't the committee propose a new type for complex numbers with

integer components?

Because complex numbers always have a real and imaginary part *per

definitionem* - there aren't "complex integers" and you can't do

"complex counting", so why should the people working on the standard

come up with a type of numbers that even the mathematicans never

did conceive?

Regards, Jens

But the mathematicians did conceive of such numbers.

Complex numbers where both the real and imaginary parts are integers

are generally known as Gaussian integers.

Some more information about Gaussian integers can be found at

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GaussianInteger.html
It is a fairly safe assumption that if you can think of a type of

number, some mathematician has already thought about it and written a

paper about them.

The reason Gaussian integers weren't included in the standard is most

likely that they are rarely used. There is not much reason to mandate

support for a feature that only a few programs will ever have any use

for, especially since it is not too difficult to write your own

functions to handle them.

Ordinary complex numbers are used much more often, so for those it made

more sense to have them as part of the language.

--

<Insert your favourite quote here.>

Erik Trulsson

er******@student.uu.se