Re: [boost] wrong result in complex pow

I will note that there is a proposal that> might alter this stance:> https://wg21.link/P1467R4 Oh thanks. This is great! It's goodto see the ball rolling on that one.

Personally, I would really enjoyto see floatN_t in C/C++ world. I was notaware of this particular proposal, which does,in fact, mention, revive and extend previous,partial (yet stalled) work by Bristow, Maddockand myself --- Floating-Point Typedefs HavingSpecified Widths - N1703. In fact, the preliminary work in https://github.com/boostorg/math/tree/develop/include/boost/math/cstdfloat (which contains the original topic of this thread) attempts to providea sensible working model for floatN_t. If ever desired to better align Boost withhttps://wg21.link/P1467R4as it progresses, please feel free to contactus (or me) in the future. Kind regards, Chris On Saturday, February 6, 2021, 1:38:06 AM GMT+1, Jeff Garland via Boost wrote: On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 10:50 AM Marshall Clow via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

On Feb 5, 2021, at 9:00 AM, John Maddock via Boost wrote:

...

...

I also noticed a few basic things, maybe you can say why that is: - Why are there explicit complex classes for FP types, why is this not

...

This is all a question for the C++ committee, my speculation would be

implemented completely via template? The advantage is that built-ins can be used, on the other hand, a separate class must be written for each FP type - with the problems we are currently having. that they wished to restrict the scope of std::complex to float/double/long double.

I refer you to https://wg21.link/complex.numbers p2, which states:         The effect of instantiating the template complex for any type other than float, double, or long double is unspecified.

— Marshall

I will note that there is a proposal that might alter this stance: https://wg21.link/P1467R4 _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost