docs: improve doctests for complex number instances in array/base/resolve-getter

[DivyanshuVortex]

---

type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes. report:

• task: lint_filenames status: passed
• task: lint_editorconfig status: passed
• task: lint_markdown status: na
• task: lint_package_json status: na
• task: lint_repl_help status: na
• task: lint_javascript_src status: na
• task: lint_javascript_cli status: na
• task: lint_javascript_examples status: na
• task: lint_javascript_tests status: na
• task: lint_javascript_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_python status: na
• task: lint_r status: na
• task: lint_c_src status: na
• task: lint_c_examples status: na
• task: lint_c_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_c_tests_fixtures status: na
• task: lint_shell status: na
• task: lint_typescript_declarations status: passed
• task: lint_typescript_tests status: passed
• task: lint_license_headers status: passed ---

Resolves a part of #8641

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• {{TODO: add description describing what this pull request does}}

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request has the following related issues:

• #{{TODO: add related issue number}}

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

• Yes
• No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

• Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
• Test/benchmark generation
• Documentation (including examples)
• Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".

{{TODO: add disclosure if applicable}}

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

[stdlib-bot]

Hello! Thank you for your contribution to stdlib.

We noticed that the contributing guidelines acknowledgment is missing from your pull request. Here's what you need to do:

1. Please read our contributing guidelines.

2. Update your pull request description to include this checked box:

   - [x] Read, understood, and followed the [contributing guidelines](https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md)

This acknowledgment confirms that you've read the guidelines, which include:

• The developer's certificate of origin
• Your agreement to license your contributions under the project's terms

We can't review or accept contributions without this acknowledgment.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. We look forward to reviewing your contribution!

[stdlib-bot]

Hello! 👋

We've noticed that you've been opening a number of PRs addressing good first issues. Thank you for your interest and enthusiasm!

Now that you've made a few contributions, we suggest no longer working on good first issues. Instead, we encourage you to prioritize cleaning up any PRs which have yet to be merged and then proceed to work on more involved tasks.

Not only does this ensure that other new contributors can work on things and get ramped up on all things stdlib, it also ensures that you can spend your time on more challenging problems. 🚀

For ideas for future PRs, feel free to search the codebase for TODOs and FIXMEs and be sure to check out other open issues on the issue tracker. Cheers!

[stdlib-bot]

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
array/base/resolve-setter	$\color{green}115/115$ $color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}5/5$ $color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}1/1$ $color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}115/115$ $color{green}+100.00%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

[DivyanshuVortex]

Hi @kgryte, there is a test that uses both the imaginary and real values. Should I update that test or leave it as is?

[stdlib-bot]

⚠️ Tracking Issue Closure Warning ⚠️

I noticed your PR description contains closing keywords ("Resolves", "Closes", or "Fixes") referencing a "Tracking Issue".

Why this matters:
Tracking issues should typically remain open until all related sub-issues are completed. GitHub automatically closes issues with such closing keywords when the PR is merged. For more information, see GitHub's documentation on using keywords in issues and pull requests.

Required action:
Use "Progresses" instead to reference the tracking issue without automatically closing it.

Thank you for your contribution to the project!

[kgryte]

LGTM

[kgryte]

there is a test that uses both the imaginary and real values. Should I update that test or leave it as is?

You can leave as is. We are not interested in removing all usage of imag and real; just where we decompose for the purpose of showing expected results.