TwoBasedIndexing.jl

> Do not add any more fuel to the flame and instead use 2-based indexing: https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl This reminds me of my last company where the answer to the 2 vs 4 space debate was 3 spaces.

Do not add any more fuel to the flame and instead use 2-based indexing: https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl Seriously, the exact value of the lower bound for indexing doesn't matter here (some algorithms are best described with the lower bound other than 0 or 1, for example). The fixed or preferred lower bound is the real problem. Any argument for/against 0-based and 1-based indexing tends to gloss over the real problem because those arguments only exist to make some languages look better than other languages. As we move away from forced explicit indexing (e.g. arr.first() or foreach instead of arr[$LBOUND] or `for (i=$LBOUND; ...)`), it becomes clear that there is no such thing like the preferred lower bound for sequences at all.

Oh well, can't let this pass... Introducing TwoBasedIndexing.jl (https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl) The point is, n-based indexing isn't really that big a deal.

Well, there exists optional 2-based indexing: https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl.

I always like to point to the Julia package TwoBasedIndexing (https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl/) which is IMHO provides the very best way to index an array. Yes, Julia defaults to 1-based indexing, and allows zero-based indexing (https://github.com/JuliaArrays/OffsetArrays.jl) or indeed whatever sort of indexing you want, yet I think the world is going to eventually come around to THE ONE TRUE indexing scheme of being two-based. :-)

I think it crucial to offer at this point the important Julia package TwoBasedIndexing.jl :-) https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl

> Also, although this is of course a preference, 1-based indexing. Advanced Julians actually go for 2-based indexing [1]. See [2] for more on this... [1] https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl [2] https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/julia-dev/tNN7...

See https://github.com/eschnett/FlexibleArrays.jl (somewhat in jest, there's also https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl)

Not two-based? https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl

For those who don't like one-based indexing, your problem is solved: there is now a package which provides two-based indexing https://github.com/simonster/TwoBasedIndexing.jl ;-) Edit: For a history of 0-based indexing see http://exple.tive.org/blarg/2013/10/22/citation-needed/ My understanding is that with modern compilers, there's no need for 0-based indexing; you can use 0-base, 1-base, or 69-base indexing as you prefer. 0-base is applicable to people creating chips or writing hardware drivers. Most scientific programmers are not so closely tied to hardware; 1-based indexing is one of the things that helps make Julia more accessible to high-school programmers or PhD students who don't want to learn binary arithmetic.