4 ms·

It's funny that programmers treat zero-indexing arrays and things as normal (even "correct"), but suddenly zero-indexing versions is something wacky. What's wei

It's funny that programmers treat zero-indexing arrays and things as normal (even "correct"), but suddenly zero-indexing versions is something wacky. What's weird to me is that 0.0.0 isn't more common in the developer world, given how frequently we start counting from 0.

dunkelheit 10y ago
I find 0.0.x versions wacky too. Version numbers (in contrast to array subscripts) are only useful in relation to previous version numbers. Ideally when a new version of the software I use comes out I can decide whether to upgrade only by comparing the version number with the one I use. E.g. in semver increased minor number means "new functionality added". So when 0.0.0 version comes out, what does it mean, compared to the absence of software? No functionality at all? :)
- Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
  It means "don't use this yet".
- cornstalks 10y ago
  What does 0.0.1 mean, compared to the absence of software? You can't compare 0.0.1 to anything if there's no other previous release. Starting at 0.0.1 is at least just as arbitrary as starting at 0.0.0, and your aversion to starting at 0.0.0 suggests you're making implicit assumptions about what the non-existent 0.0.0 means when starting at 0.0.1. But if 0.0.0 doesn't even exist then you can't really make any assumptions about it. At least 0.0.0 is clearly the very first version of something. Starting at 0.0.1 doesn't make clear that there isn't an earlier 0.0.0.
  - MatthewWilkes 10y ago
    For me, personally, 1.0.0 feels right as the first version. Compared to nothing, the first release is a major and there have been no minors. I guess I don't really see version numbers as indexes but as cardinals, hence why leading zeroes seem weird to me.
Latty 10y ago
Because non-developers deal with versions. Sure, programmers use zero-indexing because it makes a lot of common things a lot easier, but I can't imagine anyone expecting that to extend to the regular world where the first item being 1 is ingrained, and makes more sense given the use. For this reason, 0.x versions can make sense - they serve as a good flag for 'this is pre-release', because people expect version 1 to be the first released version.
oblio 10y ago
Yeah, but 0-based array indexing is a convenience measure. In the real world everybody would just call a[0] "the first element of the array".
- bpicolo 10y ago
  Time to use lisps, am I right? :)

dunkelheit 10y ago

I find 0.0.x versions wacky too. Version numbers (in contrast to array subscripts) are only useful in relation to previous version numbers. Ideally when a new version of the software I use comes out I can decide whether to upgrade only by comparing the version number with the one I use. E.g. in semver increased minor number means "new functionality added". So when 0.0.0 version comes out, what does it mean, compared to the absence of software? No functionality at all? :)

Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
It means "don't use this yet".
cornstalks 10y ago
What does 0.0.1 mean, compared to the absence of software? You can't compare 0.0.1 to anything if there's no other previous release. Starting at 0.0.1 is at least just as arbitrary as starting at 0.0.0, and your aversion to starting at 0.0.0 suggests you're making implicit assumptions about what the non-existent 0.0.0 means when starting at 0.0.1. But if 0.0.0 doesn't even exist then you can't really make any assumptions about it. At least 0.0.0 is clearly the very first version of something. Starting at 0.0.1 doesn't make clear that there isn't an earlier 0.0.0.
- MatthewWilkes 10y ago
  For me, personally, 1.0.0 feels right as the first version. Compared to nothing, the first release is a major and there have been no minors. I guess I don't really see version numbers as indexes but as cardinals, hence why leading zeroes seem weird to me.

Latty 10y ago

Because non-developers deal with versions. Sure, programmers use zero-indexing because it makes a lot of common things a lot easier, but I can't imagine anyone expecting that to extend to the regular world where the first item being 1 is ingrained, and makes more sense given the use. For this reason, 0.x versions can make sense - they serve as a good flag for 'this is pre-release', because people expect version 1 to be the first released version.

oblio 10y ago

Yeah, but 0-based array indexing is a convenience measure. In the real world everybody would just call a[0] "the first element of the array".

bpicolo 10y ago
Time to use lisps, am I right? :)