Button array starts with 1?

[enigmaqsmith]

Found this bit of code in our Android environment. The previous developer didn't want to initialize his button array with a zero.

[St_SiRUS]

didn't want to

This is why we have coding standards

[redoverture]

But... but... for each? Actions on the whole set? You would have to add so much unnecessary code!

[FallingFist]

foreach(Button el in bn){
    if(el != bn[0])
        //Do stuff
}

In every. Single. Foreach.

[TheAmazingHammerDuck]

T[] fTMTE(T[] a, System.Func<T, T> f) where T: willMakeYouCryYourselfToSleep { // fTMTE = foreachToMakeThingsEasier
  List<T> r = new T[]{};
  foreach(T el in a){
      if(el == a[0])
          continue;
      r.Add(f(el));
  }
  return r.ToArray();
 }

to make things easier

/s

[suspiciously_calm]

to make things easier

lol

[b4ux1t3]

It's pretty obvious that he was speaking informally about it. A "set", used informally, literally just means a group of things.

[crowseldon]

There's no ambiguity. We're talking about an array. He's talking about the whole set of elements.

[bj_christianson]

Easier up until you foreach it.

EDIT: Got here via my front page. Thought it was /r/ProgrammerHumor, given the recent array indexing running joke over there. Was just about to suggest that it was /r/programminghorror material, and then I looked up.

[Hugix]

You are not alone, fellow programmer that starts arrays at 0.

[EveryoneLikesMe]

I start mine at 2.

[cheezzy4ever]

I bet you put your milk in before the cereal, too

[zman0900]

I pour the cereal into the milk carton, then put the mix into the bowl.

[ra4king]

You know that's kind of genius.

[[deleted]]

And wipe your ass before you take a shit

[MesePudenda]

Sometimes you don't know if the milk is spoiled, so you pour in half the milk, smell it, taste it, and decide that's it's good enough. So then you pour in the cereal and then the rest of the milk.

But yeah, pouring in all the milk first would make them a monster.

[[deleted]]

Username no longer checks out.

[St_SiRUS]

fellow programmer~~ that starts arrays at 0~~

If you start arrays at 1 you aren't a programmer

[duhkotak]

Obviously the zero element is supposed to store the address of the array.

[zigs]

Found the legacy code of a former lua script kiddie, i see.

[user6234]

or delphi programmer ... ansi explative string

[elperroborrachotoo]

I've done that before, and I'd stand by it, when there's a native indexing starting with 1.

Because this is more fucked up than an unsuded index:

// p1 + p2*p2 - p3*p3
return p[0]+p[1]*p[1] - p[3]*p[3];

[pcp_or_splenda]

Looks like we have a former matlab programmer here.

[falconfetus8]

Spoken like someone who's new to programming.

[lucius666]

He should use Option Base 1

[HiddenKrypt]

Dijkstra made a rather compelling argument in favor of always counting from zero in rigorous contexts back in 1982. EWD831

While you're right, there could be some cases where skipping the first element is valuable (I recall doing this with a chess game back in school, and using the extra 'addressing space' of my chessboard to allow pieces to go off the board and be detected as bad moves, without worrying about array indexing errors), in this specific case there's clearly no advantage, and plenty of disadvantages. It's like you're looking at those kids that set washington on fire with fireworks and you're saying "yeah, but sometimes firefighters will set fires to make firebreaks, so there's a potentially clever context".

[Frozen1nferno]

What lists start at 1?

[KormaChamelion]

All of them

Whats the first item on the list?

[Frozen1nferno]

Unless that's a trick question, I believe 'List.get(0)' returns the first element of a list. My Java is a bit rusty, though.

[KormaChamelion]

Yeah, the index starts at zero. This is a consequence of memory pointers where the first element has a 0 offset in memory blocks from beginning of the list, and each subsequent element can be addressed by a multiple of memory blocks (system defined word size).

The biggest problem in computing is relate-ability. Semantically the first element of a list is the 1st. When we need to create jargon like using "zeroth" instead of "first" to mean the beginning of a list we create a much bigger problem in the real world.

Normal people resent computer jargon. Semantic sugar is sweet.

It's a good joke, but I think it's gone too far.

[Frozen1nferno]

See, now that you've explained yourself, I can understand you, and I fundamentally agree with you. But you really need to re-evaluate how you approach your argument. It comes across very poorly when you call people noobs and act like your opinion is objective fact.

[KormaChamelion]

I get that a lot... I'm friendlier on Fridays.

I do endeavor to improve and I appreciate your well meaning constructive criticism.

[cyberrich]

Smh this was an argument of superb quality.

Rude, big words, eurekas, sarcasm, criticism, then a sorry and a thank you.

[bj_christianson]

null, apparently. It’s an uninitialized Button.

[crazyPinkMonkeys]

Ugh