News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why numbering should start at zero (1982). Parent comment

Re:Why numbering should start at zero (1982) by caf on Thursday December 15, 2016 @09:39PM (#13190651)
...but isn't the most salient point of the fifth object that there are 4 objects preceding it? (there could be any number of object after it, and it would remain the fifth).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why numbering should start at zero (1982) by belovedeagle on Thursday December 15, 2016 @11:10PM (#13191000)
To play devil's advocate -- and let's be clear, confusing ordinals and cardinals really is the devil's work ;) -- there are 5 items not after the fifth item.

The ridiculousness of that argument should be evidence enough that the fifth item is item 4.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why numbering should start at zero (1982) by andrewflnr on Friday December 16, 2016 @04:37PM (#13197087)
Only if you phrase it awkwardly like that. Adding the fifth element creates a set of five elements.
[ Parent | on HN ]