From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2007-07-17T14:47:06+09:00
Subject: Re: The Pebble in the Ruby Shoe

On 7/16/07, Martin DeMello <martindemello@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/16/07, Axel Etzold <AEtzold@gmx.de> wrote:
> > > Raphael Gillett wrote the following on 16.07.2007 15:22 :
> > > > [...]
> > > > The pebble in the Ruby shoe is the counter-intuitive use of indexing of
> > > > elements of arrays, strings, etc., from 0 to n-1 instead of the more
> > > > natural 1 to n.   Like prisoners who have got used to their chains, the
> > > > Ruby community seems to have meekly accepted this impediment to clear
> > > > thinking.
> >
> > Dear Raphael,
> >
> > from http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/51982?&print=yes,
> >
> >  an overview article about the history of around 6000 computer programming
> > languages:
> >
> >
> >
> > "Still another perennially contentious issue is how to count. This one brings out the snarling
> > dogmatism in the meekest programmer. Suppose we have a list of three items. Do we number
> > them 1, 2, 3, or should it be 0, 1, 2? Everyone in computerdom knows the answer to that
> > question, and knows it as an eternal truth held with the deepest, visceral conviction. Only one of
> > the alternatives is logically tenable. But which is it ?.."
>
> Should array indices start at 0 or 1? My compromise of 0.5 was
> rejected without, I thought, proper consideration. -- Stan
> Kelly-Bootle
No I do not believe so, your approach was accepted only that, instead
of the arithmetic mean, the geometric mean has eventually been chosen.
You have a lot of merit in this compromise and I want to thank you on
behalf of the Ruby Community.
Robert

-- 
I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java.
I just didn't know it would be called Ruby
-- Kent Beck