-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
Matricies are 1-indexed #23
Comments
This was actually intentional. As a mathematician, I'm used to index matrices starting from 1. This is of course a design choice that some people like, and some people don't. It was no mistake. Although we can argue which one is preferable from different point of views. The main issue here is that, as you can see from the issue list, I haven't been doing a good job maintaining this particular library. Mainly because of time concerns. I have many libraries (both public and private) under my supervision. I'll allocate some time this weekend to approach the different issues open and make a release. But it won't include a drastic change like the one proposed here. And yes, changing Thanks! |
Keep matrices 1 indexed. Just put it more clearly in the documentation for us computer scientists. |
Keep matrices 1 indexed. It's not like |
Because your library exposes many functions which require When working with Because you do not do so, your package does not satisfy the following intuitive law, because the user must translate between two numbering schemes:
|
That's a fair argument. |
I noticed that you had an indexing error in your library. If I want to get the element in the fist column of the first row I would need to erroneously call
m ! (1,1)
rather than the correct expressionm ! (0,0)
. As you can see from theVector
library that you used internally, sequential data structures 0-indexed.I'm sure that this is just a simple mistake in your internal
encode
function definition. While this does constitute a pretty serious defect in the library, it was probably just a simple off by one error that can be fixed quickly in version4.0.0.0
!The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: