I know this is an old question, but the accepted answer is simply wrong. A minus sign got lost somewhere. As
, the numerator approaches

while the denominator a non-zero (complex!) number, so the overall limit should be 0.
However, I suspect there may have been a typo in the original question, and it was intended to say

Now evaluating at
, the limit has the indeterminate form 0/0 - a much more interesting result! To evaluate the limit, recall the difference of squares identity,

Rewrite the limit as

where

Then

By canceling the factors of
, we've removed the discontinuity at
. So
