Python Feature Request: Allow changing base of member indices to 1

[Paddy]

On Apr 15, 6:42 pm, "Javier Bezos" <see_below_no_s... at yahoo.es> wrote:
> > Here is a document giving good reasons for indexing to start at
> > zero, as in Python.
> >http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EWD831.html
> > The author has done a bit:
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dijkstra
>
> Dijkstra's argument is obsolete, as it is based on
> how array length was computed many years ago -- if
> we have an array a = b..e, then the lenght of a
> is e-b (half open range). Good at low level
> programming.
>
> But a quarter of a century after we know concepts
> are much better than low level programming and
> explicit computations -- if we have an array
> a = b..e, then the length of a should be a.length()
> (or a.length(b,e)), and it is independent of
> arbitrary ranges, index bases, or even steps
> (eg, {-4, -2, 0, 2, 4}).
>
> Of course, the index base should be always the
> same _by default_ (individual lists could require
> another index base, and that's fine). Otherwise
> it would a mess, as you said.
>
> Javier
> -----------------------------http://www.texytipografia.com

Hi Javier,
You seem to have missed out array *indexing*
in your argument, or is array indexing obsolete?

- Paddy.