Subject: Re: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPath From: "Kevin Grover" <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 21:31:23 -0700 |
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 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. > > I don't think hardware addressing is the only benefit of 0-based addressing. > It also makes computations easier. If you number the rows and columns on a > chessboard from 0-7, and the squares from 0-63, then the square number is > row*8+column, whereas with 1-based addressing it is (row-1)*8+column. Shouldn't that last equation be (row-1)*8+column-1 ? > > And we do sometimes use 0-based logic in real life too. In many countries > the "first floor" is the one above where you enter the building; and in many > societies a child is "1 year old" between 12 months and 24 months after > their birth. > > But on balance I do think 1-based logic was the right choice for XPath and > XSLT. > > Michael Kay > http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Justin Johansson |
Re: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Dimitre Novatchev | Date | RE: [xsl] One-based indexes in XPat, Owen Rees |
Month |