[REBOL] Re: R: Re: Correct Behaviour? Was False = 2 ????
From: robbo1mark:aol at: 4-Jul-2001 8:33
To paraphrase what Ken Antony expressed so eloquently yesterday..
Counting is NOT the same as indexing!
the series of natural numbers
0 1 2 3 4 5 ....... infinity
which is the first number? 0 or 1 ?
YES I too think REBOL is BETTER! but I don't agree
that it should / necessarily has to be different in
this respect.
I previously swayed on this issue but the example
>> a: [ a b c d]
== [a b c d]
>> index? a
== 1
>> a: next a
== [b c d]
>> pick a 1
== b
>> index? a
== 2
>> pick a -1
== a
this swayed it for me! IMHO series should be traversed
backwards & forwards from the current index point which
to me logically is index position ZERO.
That's all.
Mark Dickson
In a message dated Wed, 4 Jul 2001 7:32:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Alekk" <[alekk--obywatel--pl]>
writes:
<<
----- Original Message -----
From: <[Robbo1Mark--aol--com]>
To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 10:20 AM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: R: Re: Correct Behaviour? Was False = 2 ????
[...]
> I looked at Visual Basic, Pascal, Modula-2, C, C++, C#, Java, Javascript,
Perl, Python, Fortran amongst others and they ALL use zero based indexing.
[...]
So what? REBOL is different ;)
IMO REBOL is designed with people in mind. When You say "all other
languages..." it is like "millions of flies can't be wrong. Let's eat ...".
1. First, second ... - increases readability. With zero at start - it would
be strange.
2. Length and last index is the same number - no need for another function.
3. Publicity - "Ah, THAT is the language which use ONE based indexing".
4. You can always write Your own dialect.
Aleksander K.
[alekk--obywatel--pl]
