From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 6 Jan 93 19:40:57 GMT
From: eachus@mitre-bedford.arpa  (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: Enum's start at 0?
Message-ID: <EACHUS.93Jan6144057@goldfinger.mitre.org>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1993Jan6.025929.18871@seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael 
Feldman) writes:

   In article <1993Jan5.220007.26218@gvl.unisys.com> schrey@prc.unisys.com writ
es:
   > >   All right... then why do string indices start at 1? :-)

   > Beats me. Anyone out there have an authoritative answer?

   Is there such a thing?  (I assume you don't want me to point to
Appendix C(17) and say because...)  There was a lot of debate on this
in 1981-1982, but as I remember it, it was more concerned with
replacing the subtypes NONNEGATIVE and NATURAL with the more standard
NATURAL and POSITIVE.  Once these were changed STRING changed to
match.

    I guess the real answer is that there was always an expectation
that for "normal" strings 'LENGTH = 'LAST and this requires that
STRINGs be based at one.



--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...