A Brief Totally Accurate History Of Programming Languages

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A Brief Totally Accurate History Of Programming Languages

Peter Pimley
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A Brief Totally Accurate History Of Programming Languages

David Crayford
I've never understood why Lua attracts so much opprobrium for 1 based
indexing. I started my career working on mainframes and all the
languages had 1 based indexing (COBOL, PL1, Fortran, REXX).
It wasn't until I started using C that I had ever used a language with 0
based indexing which makes sense for a language where arrays decay to
pointers. IMO, the Lua authors got it right.


On 28/03/2018 4:41 PM, Peter Pimley wrote:
> Lua gets a mention :)
>
> https://medium.com/@caspervonb/a-brief-totally-accurate-history-of-programming-languages-cd93ec806124


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A Brief Totally Accurate History Of Programming Languages

Charles Heywood
Lua is the most commonly used, though. ColdFusion also gets some nitpicks about it but there's so many other reasons to pick on CF.

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018, 12:47 AM David Crayford <[hidden email]> wrote:
I've never understood why Lua attracts so much opprobrium for 1 based
indexing. I started my career working on mainframes and all the
languages had 1 based indexing (COBOL, PL1, Fortran, REXX).
It wasn't until I started using C that I had ever used a language with 0
based indexing which makes sense for a language where arrays decay to
pointers. IMO, the Lua authors got it right.


On 28/03/2018 4:41 PM, Peter Pimley wrote:
> Lua gets a mention :)
>
> https://medium.com/@caspervonb/a-brief-totally-accurate-history-of-programming-languages-cd93ec806124


--
--
Ryan | Charles <[hidden email]>
Software Developer / System Administrator
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A Brief Totally Accurate History Of Programming Languages

steve donovan
In reply to this post by David Crayford
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 7:46 AM, David Crayford <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It wasn't until I started using C that I had ever used a language with 0
> based indexing which makes sense for a language where arrays decay to
> pointers. IMO, the Lua authors got it right.

Totally agree - in fact the decision was to fit in with technical but
non-programmer users who were accustomed to 1-based indexing like
Fortran.

It is also a mystery why some people base technical decisions on silly
reasons - it's possible that they are simply more vocal and
fundamentally unserious people.