News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Julia 0.5 release by zerofan on Tuesday September 20, 2016 @12:10AM (#12536989)
> I have mentioned in previous threads on the subject that julia's 1-indexed arrays don't matter much in practice because the generic APIs hide that fact most of the time.

My guess is that most people who prefer zero-based feel strongly about it, and most people that like one-based don't care that much. If it really doesn't matter that much, I think Julia should've gone with zero. FFTs, Vandermonde matrices (least squares), polynomials, and pretty much anything where the array subscript relates to the mathematics is cleaner with zero-based arrays.

Re:Julia 0.5 release by sundarurfriend on Tuesday September 20, 2016 @06:56AM (#12538514)
> My guess is that most people who prefer zero-based feel strongly about it, and most people that like one-based don't care that much.

FWIW, as someone in the latter category (liking one-based indexing), I'd say you're partially correct: I'm not emotional attached to 1-based indexing the way some 0-based folks seem to be, but it's a practical nicety and one of the things I'm really glad Julia chose to do. Making 0-based the default would definitely reduce its appeal to me.

Re:Julia 0.5 release by zerofan on Tuesday September 20, 2016 @08:59AM (#12539133)
Call it emotional if you like, but I won't use a language that has an off by one error built into its specfication :-)