On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 04:12:04 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>J. Clifford Dyer a écrit : >> On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 04:11:07PM -0000, Grant Edwards wrote >> regarding Re: Python Magazine: Issue 1 Free!: >> >>> On 2007-10-05, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>>>> I've just been told by the editors at Python Magazine that >>>>>> the first issue is out. >>>>> >>>>> The first issue is issue number 10? >>>>> >>>>> That's a bit silly. >>>> >>>> It's the October edition. They obviously decided to make sure the >>>> month numbering was consistent across the volumes. >>> >>> I presumed that was the reasoning. It just seems counter-intuitive >>> (and sort of un-Pythonic) to start numbering a sequence of objects >>> at 10. ;) >>> >> >> >> Well, it's also unpythonic to start numbering a sequence at 1, but >> it's clearly the right thing to do in this case. > >As far as I'm concerned, if I had to number a magazine about >programming, I'd obviously start with 0. And since the "first" issue is free that would be best here too. >Then it would be n°1, n°10, >n°11, n°100 etc !-) But probably with enough leading zeros to last the expected lifetime (8 bits should about do it?) so they'd sort properly: 0000 0000 0000 0001 etc. wwwayne -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
