On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 22:17:22 -0700 (PDT), Jonathan Lang > Agreed; that's why I'd include "last" for newbies to use. "0th" as "last" > works only as an extension of "-1st" as "first from last", "-2nd" as > "second from last", and so on; you have positive numbers counting from the > first, and negative numbers counting from next-to-last, leaving only 0th > unused and only last unaccounted for.
Am I the only one that thinks that -1st should return the last element in an array under the nth scheme? 1st should mean the first element. -1st should mean the first element of the reversed array. Don't say -1st is the "first from last". If last is the opposite of first, I would expect 1st to mean "first from first," which would mean the second. Say "first from the end". -- matt
