Regarding the initial argument, I'd opt for C or D; since here we're being consistent with our signs and therefore the statement's more readable. To me this is

Regarding the initial argument, I'd opt for C or D; since here we're being consistent with our signs and therefore the statement's more readable. To me this is more apparent than the number of elements being the upper bound minus the lower, or natural numbers shrinking to unnatural (which I confess I don't understand given here i is by definition an integer and thus natural). Of these two I'd likely opt for C since this lends itself to natural language (e.g. if I ask someone to choose a number between 1 and 10 I mean the choice is inclusive of 1 and 10), so again is likely more readable. Also "pernicious: having a harmful effect, especially in a gradual or subtle way". I don't understand this statement either. A language not mentioned, PowerShell, uses two dots to great effect (ellipses vs two dots is another debate; but I can't see how one would be considered harmful and the other not). `1..10 | %{"we're at number {0}" -f $_}`; simple, clear and obvious. The whole article reads as if someone's trying to show off their intellect, rather than present an honest analysis of the benefits of the merits of the different indexing/numbering systems. @TOGoS's comment on this thread, on the other hand gives a compelling and well reasoned argument of when to use each system.