Are you indexing your fingers or counting them ?
Indexing starts ar 0 but counting starts at 1.
This.
One of the reasons indexing starts at zero is because back when we used to use pointers and memory addresses, the first byte(s) of an array were at the address where the array was stored. Let’s say it is at 1234. If it was an array of bytes, the first data element was at 1234, or 1234 + 0. The second element would be at 1235, or 1234 + 1. So the first element is at location 0 and the second at location 1, where the index is actually just an offset from the base address. There may be other/better reasons, but that’s what I was taught back in the 90s.
Counting always starts at 1 (if we’re only using integers). You don’t eat a hamburger and say you ate zero hamburgers.
I do say I ate zero hamburgers if I just started counting and I have yet to eat one
When you’ve eaten more than 50% of the hamburger, do you claim to have eaten one, or do you claim zero? Are you useing standard founding or are you using floor()?
Perchance programming with pointers has plunged as a percentage of programmers.
But thank you. I was hoping someone would notice that.
Ffs. 16, 8, 4, 2, 1.
I’m glad I’m not the only one. My son is a year and half old. I’ve been teaching to count on his hand in binary since day 0. He goes wild and celebrates when we reach 31 🙂
I’m in my mid 40s, and I’ve never thought to count in binary on my fingers. I haven’t needed to use binary for about 30 years, and I’m easily the geekiest of my friends, so I’ve never had an excuse to do it for fun.
You’ve just put a huge smile on my face.
Guess what I’m teaching my kid this week 😁
Most of the time it’s not exactly useful and some of the positions are awkward (e.g. 8, 9, 10), counting to 31 on one hand is maybe useful.
More useful IMO is counting in base 6 and treating each hand as a single digit. i.e counting to 35 on 2 hands without awkward fingerings. Better than 10, less awkward than binary.
Jokes on you, I use my fingers as bits for a total of 1024 numbers (0-1023). Or I can sacrifice 1 finger time be a sign bit and count negative numbers too.
Jokes on you, fingers are tri-state (fully extended, fully closed, bent at middle knuckle) not binary, so I can count to 59049.
Someone with better finger control should be able to treat them as quad-state, granting the ability to count to 1048576 by bending just the outer knuckle.
I like this idea in theory, but some combinations of fingers are very awkward to extend without the others, and one particular combination is very rude.
I’ve tried this a few times and my fingers always get really Fucking confused after about four bits.
Count in binary up to 1023 on your hands you filthy casual
You count one finger up as the same as no fingers up? Counting is not the same as an index.
