On 2002-12-06 at 17:59:33, Larry Wall wrote:
> Now all we have to do is
> convince everyone that the year 1 B.C. is the same as year 0 A.D.,
> and 2 B.C. is the same as -1 A.D., and so on.
Well, since that's already true, it hopefully won't take much
convincing. :) If you mean to convince the gen
On Fri, 06 Dec 2002 14:16:43 +, Brad Hughes wrote:
> In any case, the choice of default base index is less important for Perl than
> for other languages given how seldom arrays in Perl are accessed by index as
> opposed to manipulated by push, pop, for $x (@array) loops and such.
I slice a lo
> "DC" == Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DC> A practical argument in its favour is that it makes
DC> circular-lists-via-modulo:
DC> @list[++nextidx%7] = $nextval;
DC> $day_name = <>[$day%7];
DC> both work correctly.
not to defend 1 based arrays but all you have to
Larry wrote:
: Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
: will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
How about, because I like it? You may, of course, see that as a
legacy argument, depending on our relative ages... :-)
A practical argument in its fav
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:45:39AM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: I'm going to ask something that's probably going to launch off into a long,
: silly thread. But I'm really curious what the results will be so I'll ask
: it anyway. Think of it as an experiment.
:
: So here's your essay topic:
Damien Neil wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:45:39AM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
Answer 1: Ignoring legacy, it won't.
Bingo.
Answer 2: Because C uses 0-based i
> 2002-12-05 10:45:39, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm going to ask something that's probably going to launch off into a
> long, silly thread. But I'm really curious what the results will be so
> I'll ask it anyway. Think of it as an experiment.
>
> So here's your essay topic:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:45:39AM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
> will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
Answer 1: Ignoring legacy, it won't.
Answer 2: Because C uses 0-based indexes, Parrot is written in C
On 05/12/02 02:45 -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I'm going to ask something that's probably going to launch off into a long,
> silly thread. But I'm really curious what the results will be so I'll ask
> it anyway. Think of it as an experiment.
>
> So here's your essay topic:
>
> Explain how
> Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start
> at 0 will benefit most users.
The languages which do not start their indices at 0 are dead or dying.
> Do not invoke legacy.
How about FUD? :-)
=Austin
--- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm going to ask
On Thu 05 Dec, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> So here's your essay topic:
>
> Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
> will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
>
> [1] ie. "because that's how most other languages do it" or "everyone is
> used to it by now"
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 02:45:39 -0800
> From: Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Sender: Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
>
> I'm going to as
12 matches
Mail list logo
