Subject: Re: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPath From: "Mukul Gandhi" <gandhi.mukul@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 23:00:23 +0530 |
I don't know if I am right. But I think 0 based indexes in low level languages (I consider Java or C to be low level than XPath. Even I am talking about assembly languages.) have relation to hardware addressing. For e.g., a memory might have addresses ranging from 0000 to 1111 (this is just a small amount of memory). This probably has got to do with logic of bits, where 0 has a very important meaning. Lot of programming languages (also mentioned by you) have 0 based indexes (in arrays, strings etc.), so compilers can easily map them to hardware locations. Indexes in XPath start from 1 because it's more convenient for the users. On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Justin Johansson <procode@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Trusting this question is relevant to the XSL List. > > Would someone please give me advice as to why "1-based" indexes are used in > XPath, such as para[1] instead of para[0] for the first para item/element? > > Why does the spec for XPath (and its/XQuery operator/function library) go > against the norm for modern programming languages in which zero is the base > for array-like collections? > > The reason for my question is to do with reconciling XPath and XSLT with an > implementation in Javascript in which zero is the base index for arrays. > My users may well be perplexed by having to decide whether an index number > is in XPath/XSLT-world or Javascript-world. > > Thanks for comments, > > Justin Johansson -- Regards, Mukul Gandhi
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Wendell Piez | Thread | RE: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Colin Adams | Date | Re: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Justin Johansson |
Month |