Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: why the array index has to start at 0??

by Zen (Deacon)
on Jun 23, 2009 at 14:47 UTC ( #774042=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: why the array index has to start at 0??
in thread why the array index has to start at 0??

This argument by Dijkstra is silly. Yes, I said it. Doesn't matter who says it; if the argument is aesthetic, that's not a reason. Consider:

N1..Nn (N sub 1 to N sub n)

My notation is "nicer," therefore it's better? No! The offset argument is better for the 0 discussion, but in the end it comes down to the generally accepted culture of using 0. If you work in a vacuum, by all means set it to be whatever your favorite number is.


Comment on Re^2: why the array index has to start at 0??
Re^3: why the array index has to start at 0??
by roboticus (Chancellor) on Dec 21, 2012 at 16:32 UTC

    Zen:

    I don't think it's silly, rather it just moves the question a bit. As you indicate, the question is merely moved to "which is the better way of expressing a range". It seems that Djikstra prefers "0 <= i < N" to "1<= i < N+1". However, he doesn't say why that's any better. I agree that it looks better, but there's another formulation "0 < i <= N" that looks just as good. Why isn't that just as good? He leaves the question open.

    ...roboticus

    When your only tool is a hammer, all problems look like your thumb.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://774042]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others musing on the Monastery: (5)
As of 2015-07-05 18:21 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The top three priorities of my open tasks are (in descending order of likelihood to be worked on) ...









    Results (67 votes), past polls