Environment versions
Network:
Windows 2008 Server
>>>>That's interesting logic, Fabio and it probably is what the people who wrote the language had in mind.
>>>>However when someone asks "What does 'ABC' begin with?", I will continue to answer "A", not "nothing."
>>>
>>>How about zero-based arrays? To the question "with which element does the array begin" you'd have to say "zeroeth", IOW, the nothingth.
>>>
>>
>>Which is exactly why zero-based anything makes no sense. It's a hang over from the early days of cybernetics when bits were precious and no one wanted to waste a zero bit in addressing memory so they used it to address the first location.
>>
>>Suppose the first child in every family's name was "".
>>That would make as much sense as zero-based addressing.
>
>Zero based address is the answer to "how many positions away from the start", not "which one". So your analogy is a bit flawed.
>
>And it's not about storage, it's about how one calculates the position. It's start+ElementLength*i, so if i=0 you get the one which is exactly at the start. Making this one-based would require that a three element array holds four positions, i.e. it would waste the first (ahem, zeroeth). Or it would have to make a copy of the parameter, decrease it by one (b'cause it was creased :) and then use it in the above formula. which is probably what one-based systems do.
And then we have the lovely example of staring with one... 1 C.E. is preceded by 1 B.C.E. -- and as a result, computation of time passed between C.E. and B.C.E. will need to be handled as a special case.
Previous
Next
Reply
View the map of this thread
View the map of this thread starting from this message only
View all messages of this thread
View all messages of this thread starting from this message only