From: Richard Peters (R.A.Peters_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-28 07:12:05
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kloss, Burkhard" <Burkhard.Kloss_at_[hidden]>
> >There was no conclusion (will there ever be?).
> >Currently indexing is 1-based, and there's an upcoming article about
> >tuples in CUJ, which describes them as 1-base indexed.
> >However, this doesn't prevent taking the other alternative,
> >if that is considered better.
> >So those who feel strongly about this issue, speak up now and we'll
> >change to 0-based. Otherwise, I'd suggest leaving it as it is.
> Just to cast my vote - 0 based indexing is far more consistent with other
> indexing in C++ - I would find 1 based indexing terribly confusing.
I second this. 1 based indexing seems to be used only by mathematicians, and
even then only because everybody has done that in the past.
With C++ (and afaik, in almost all other programming languages), the 0 based
indexing is used because of easier intuitive use.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk