Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"keeping the lower bound within the natural numbers; having the upper bound be the number of elements in the preceding sequence, etc."

Read your post and understand the same can be said of using one-based indexing.



That's false. You'd be forced to sacrifice the exclusive upper bound, which would then force you to sacrifice the difference between the upper and lower bounds being the number of elts in the collection. Unless the lower bound was exclusive, in which case it could be an unnatural number.

No, the only way there's no lump in the carpet is his way.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: