fixed.
That is not an acceptable choice for [itex]d/dz[/itex].
If [itex]f = u + iv[/itex] is analytic in a neighbourhood of [itex]z[/itex], then by definition the following limit exists, and is independent of how [itex]h \in \mathbb{C}[/itex] approaches zero: [tex]
\frac{df}{dz} = \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{f(z + h) - f(z)}{h} = \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{f(x + \mathrm{Re}(h), y + \mathrm{Im}(h)) - f(x,y)}{h}.[/tex] Thus you can take [itex]h \in \mathbb{R}[/itex] so that [tex]
\frac{df}{dz} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} + i \frac{\partial v}{\partial x},[/tex] but instead you can take [itex]h \in i\mathbb{R}[/itex] so that [tex]
\frac{df}{dz} = -i\frac{\partial f}{\partial y} = -i\frac{\partial u}{\partial y} + \frac{\partial v}{\partial y}[/tex] and since these are equal we must have [tex]
\frac{\partial u}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial v}{\partial y}, \qquad<br />
\frac{\partial v}{\partial x} = -\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}[/tex] which are the Cauchy-Riemann equations.
One also has [tex]
\frac{df}{dz} = \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{f(x + \mathrm{Re}(h), y + \mathrm{Im}(h)) - f(x,y)}{h}\\ = \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{f(x + \mathrm{Re}(h), y + \mathrm{Im}(h)) - f(x, y + \mathrm{Im}(h))}{h} + \lim_{h \to 0}\frac{f(x, y + \mathrm{Im}(h)) - f(x,y)}{h} \\<br />
= \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{\mathrm{Re}(h)}h \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} + \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{\mathrm{Im}(h)}h \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}.[/tex]