3 ms·
"C"? It's more likely to be "G" round here. By the way, has anyone else had this problem: you're on floor 10, say, and you want to get to floor 15, say, so you
by bloak 2y ago
"C"? It's more likely to be "G" round here.
By the way, has anyone else had this problem: you're on floor 10, say, and you want to get to floor 15, say, so you run up 5 flights of stairs and try to find the room but then after a while you realise that somehow you've ended up on floor 16 so you think you're going demented and can't count but after this has happened a few times you realise ... THE IDIOTS HAVE OMITTED FLOOR 13!
If there's one thing worse than 1-based indexing it's leaving-out-13-based indexing ... Has any programming language tried doing that with arrays, I wonder?
- InsideOutSanta 2y ago> It's more likely to be "G" round here I see what you did there. Somebody should create a programming language that implements all real-world number idiosyncracies. Don't have 4 or 13; define π as 3 and τ as 6, print 6 three times every time it occurs for good luck (or bad luck, depending on where you live), replace all numbers close to 8 with 8 in money values for great prosperity, have a constant for "dozen" that's 13 in case you're counting loaves of bread, have a rounding function that rounds to a close number that's easy to say depending on your locale... And let's go with 0.5-based indexing as a compromise.