As @Quantum noted, substituting $du=\csc xdx$ proves a) is correct. Expressing $\csc x$ in terms of this $u$ doesn't use complex eponentials, despite their role in their formula for $\sin x$.
Bioche's rules suggest instead substituting $v=\cos x$, giving $\int_0^{1/\sqrt{2}}2^{17}(1-v^2)^{-9}dv$. While this doesn't easily relate to the original problem (it doesn't help you think to try $u=\tfrac12\ln\tfrac{1+v}{1-v}$), it does make a role for complex exponentials look even less likely, because of an obvious (very tedious) integral evaluation strategy over $\Bbb R$ in partial fractions.
Why does this problem not call for complex exponentials, even though trigonometry is definable in terms of it? The simplest answer I can give is that there's actually a real-only way to relate real exponentials to complex ones, although you can rewrite it in terms of complex numbers if you really want to. Define the Gudermannian function$$\operatorname{gd}x:=2\arctan\tanh\tfrac{x}{2}$$and its inverse the Lambertian$$\operatorname{lam}x:=2\operatorname{artanh}\tan\tfrac{x}{2},$$odd functions which satisfy (among other things)$$\operatorname{gd}^\prime x=\operatorname{sech}x,\,\operatorname{lam}^\prime x=\sec x.$$If it seems weird that this works, notice$$t=\tan\frac{y}{2}=\tanh\frac{z}{2}\implies\sin y=\tanh z=\frac{2t}{1+t^2},\,\cos y=\operatorname{sech}z=\frac{1-t^2}{1+t^2}.$$Famously, integrating odd powers of the (co)secant reduces to the Lambertian (whereas with their hyperbolic counterparts the Gudermannian comes up). So the large odd power of $17$ hides the fact that you may as well be asking why integrant $\csc x$ doesn't use complex exponentials.