4 ms·

Yet another battle won in the 0 indexing vs. 1 indexing war

kazinator 3y ago
It just shows you how reality-denying the 1 indexers can be, going as far as calling a newborn 1 even though (if normal term) it was conceived roughly 0.75 years ago.
- user982 3y ago
  Don't consider it an age then, think of it as "the count of calendar years within which a person has existed." A newborn has only seen 1 year, 2023. An infant born any time in 2022 has lived across 2 years. This simplifies things when you only need, or only have, someone's year of birth.
  - kazinator 3y ago
    Why restrict to years? I have existed in two calendar millennia.
- creatonez 3y ago
  There is no indexing standard that is more fundamental than another. For example zero-indexing is particularly unnatural when working with mathematical series (https://math.stackexchange.com/a/1203057 https://math.stackexchange.com/a/1203057 ). It made a ton of sense for computing because every arbitrary sequence of bits represents a valid index, but it falls short in some other domains.
- kelipso 3y ago
  The more reality denying part is when you ignore that age is calculated on distance and not counting.
petesergeant 3y ago
even weirder than that, as far as I can tell, as the whole year cohort ages together on the same day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_age_reckoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_age_reckoning
- rhplus 3y ago
  It's not that weird - I'm sure most folks spend their school-years referring to other kids as "the same year (grade) as me" or "the year (grade) above/below me". Even to this day, I intuitively group friends based on the academic year group they were in.
  - petesergeant 3y ago
    > Even to this day, I intuitively group friends based on the academic year group they were in How far out of school are you?
    - Symbiote 3y ago
      I left university over 10 years ago, but I'm still aware of those friends who were in my year, vs others who were a year or two ahead or behind. People from my year are the ones I lived with, did group projects with, worked until midnight trying to solve a difficult task that had been set, celebrated the last exam with, etc. I certainly don't know the year for everyone. Students I mostly saw at parties, who studied different subjects (or went to different universities, for it was London) could easily be my year ±3 or more.
      - petesergeant 3y ago
        I feel like the op was mentally translating people they’d never shared an academic context with into how many academic years above or below them they were — I’d noticed myself doing this for a couple of years after I left education
fosk 3y ago
Lua is the “last standing man” now.
- adregan 3y ago
  Hold your horses, APL[1] is not dead yet. However, at some point in its history, APL did gain the ability to assign the Index Origin[2] to 0 if the problem called for it via: ⎕IO←0 0: intentionally started the indexes from 1 ;) 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language) 2: https://aplwiki.com/wiki/Index_origin https://aplwiki.com/wiki/Index_origin
- pif 3y ago
  And FORTRAN
- goosedragons 3y ago
  R still uses 1 indexing, Julia as well.
- nine_k 3y ago
  Every language for scientific computation uses 1-based indexes, to follow the tradition of using them in formulas. FORTRAN, APL, Julia, R, MATLAB, GNU Octane, etc. I remember that (some versions of) BASIC back in the day had an option to switch between 1-based and 0-based indexing, to appeal to both Fortran and C folks.
  - Y_Y 3y ago
    In physics, relativists usually count from 0. Furthermore on the numerical side, C is at least as popular as Fortran. Julia lets you switch the index base too. Finally a special mention for Mathematica, which appears to be 1-based, but in fact is a thinly disguised 0-based lisp, {a,b} is just List[a,b] is really just (List a b) so of course if you want b you ask for element 2, element 0 is the head and is just List.
  - frozenport 3y ago
    Numpy
xeonmc 3y ago
I prefer calling it "floor-index" vs "ceil-index" rather than 0/1 or offset/count based
- rcme 3y ago
  Both 0 and 1 indexing aim to answer the question: "what is the index of the 1st element?" floor(1) = 1 and ceil(1) = 1 so I'm not sure how your names apply.
  - edgineer 3y ago
    floor and ceil ideas apply to age and calendar years nicely because the underlying value, time, is on the real number line.

It just shows you how reality-denying the 1 indexers can be, going as far as calling a newborn 1 even though (if normal term) it was conceived roughly 0.75 years ago.

user982 3y ago
Don't consider it an age then, think of it as "the count of calendar years within which a person has existed." A newborn has only seen 1 year, 2023. An infant born any time in 2022 has lived across 2 years. This simplifies things when you only need, or only have, someone's year of birth.
- kazinator 3y ago
  Why restrict to years? I have existed in two calendar millennia.
creatonez 3y ago
There is no indexing standard that is more fundamental than another. For example zero-indexing is particularly unnatural when working with mathematical series (https://math.stackexchange.com/a/1203057 https://math.stackexchange.com/a/1203057 ). It made a ton of sense for computing because every arbitrary sequence of bits represents a valid index, but it falls short in some other domains.
kelipso 3y ago
The more reality denying part is when you ignore that age is calculated on distance and not counting.

petesergeant 3y ago

even weirder than that, as far as I can tell, as the whole year cohort ages together on the same day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_age_reckoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_age_reckoning

rhplus 3y ago
It's not that weird - I'm sure most folks spend their school-years referring to other kids as "the same year (grade) as me" or "the year (grade) above/below me". Even to this day, I intuitively group friends based on the academic year group they were in.
- petesergeant 3y ago
  > Even to this day, I intuitively group friends based on the academic year group they were in How far out of school are you?
  - Symbiote 3y ago
    I left university over 10 years ago, but I'm still aware of those friends who were in my year, vs others who were a year or two ahead or behind. People from my year are the ones I lived with, did group projects with, worked until midnight trying to solve a difficult task that had been set, celebrated the last exam with, etc. I certainly don't know the year for everyone. Students I mostly saw at parties, who studied different subjects (or went to different universities, for it was London) could easily be my year ±3 or more.
    - petesergeant 3y ago
      I feel like the op was mentally translating people they’d never shared an academic context with into how many academic years above or below them they were — I’d noticed myself doing this for a couple of years after I left education

fosk 3y ago

Lua is the “last standing man” now.

adregan 3y ago
Hold your horses, APL[1] is not dead yet. However, at some point in its history, APL did gain the ability to assign the Index Origin[2] to 0 if the problem called for it via: ⎕IO←0 0: intentionally started the indexes from 1 ;) 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language) 2: https://aplwiki.com/wiki/Index_origin https://aplwiki.com/wiki/Index_origin
pif 3y ago
And FORTRAN
goosedragons 3y ago
R still uses 1 indexing, Julia as well.
nine_k 3y ago
Every language for scientific computation uses 1-based indexes, to follow the tradition of using them in formulas. FORTRAN, APL, Julia, R, MATLAB, GNU Octane, etc. I remember that (some versions of) BASIC back in the day had an option to switch between 1-based and 0-based indexing, to appeal to both Fortran and C folks.
- Y_Y 3y ago
  In physics, relativists usually count from 0. Furthermore on the numerical side, C is at least as popular as Fortran. Julia lets you switch the index base too. Finally a special mention for Mathematica, which appears to be 1-based, but in fact is a thinly disguised 0-based lisp, {a,b} is just List[a,b] is really just (List a b) so of course if you want b you ask for element 2, element 0 is the head and is just List.
- frozenport 3y ago
  Numpy

xeonmc 3y ago

I prefer calling it "floor-index" vs "ceil-index" rather than 0/1 or offset/count based

rcme 3y ago
Both 0 and 1 indexing aim to answer the question: "what is the index of the 1st element?" floor(1) = 1 and ceil(1) = 1 so I'm not sure how your names apply.
- edgineer 3y ago
  floor and ceil ideas apply to age and calendar years nicely because the underlying value, time, is on the real number line.