Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 |
| Date | 2015-11-24 15:22 +0000 |
| Organization | Go wash your mouth. |
| Message-ID | <56547ef1.595937@news.xs4all.nl> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <lnk2p835ht.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <n2vom6$l65$1@dont-email.me> <lnfuzw34by.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <n305ej$anc$1@speranza.aioe.org> <7ua75bpn5ftacakhp3a014119819v1gfgt@4ax.com> |
Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> wrote: > I also have a Chumash numbered conventionally, but it's printed RTL, > so you flip the pages from what would be the back of a conventional > book. There the odd pages are on the left side, and I really have no > idea if that's then the recto or verso... Front is recto, back is verso. "Recto", in this case, does not mean "not left", but "proper" or "up-front". (And "verso" means "turned".) You always read recto first, then verso - if at all. In manuscripts with writing on only one side, that's the recto side. In Hebrew, I presume, if you did that, you'd write only on the left-hand page; therefore, in that case, recto is left. Also, in one-side-only cases, and other early manuscripts and prints, if there is a page number, it's generally one for each sheet, not each side. You then don't have 1 with its back side 2, opposite 3, back side 4; you have 1 recto, back side 1 verso, opposite 2 recto, back side 2 verso. In those cases, often (almost always?) only the recto is numbered. Richard
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 G G <gdotone@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 18:50 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-21 19:31 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-22 00:15 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-22 07:20 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-22 16:22 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-22 08:44 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-11-22 10:37 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-22 15:50 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-11-22 11:02 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-22 16:15 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-22 16:42 +1300
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 G G <gdotone@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 19:55 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-23 11:01 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-23 19:18 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-23 11:26 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 22:54 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-23 18:37 -0600
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-24 15:22 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-24 15:13 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-11-22 01:21 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-22 15:00 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-11-22 10:15 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 13:47 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-23 14:50 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-11-23 12:01 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-23 12:12 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-11-23 12:57 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 23:08 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 bert <bert.hutchings@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-23 08:52 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-22 15:42 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-22 12:36 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-22 21:06 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-22 10:28 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-22 12:04 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-11-22 11:24 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 G G <gdotone@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 04:29 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 see.my.homepage@gmail.com - 2015-11-22 04:54 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-22 13:43 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-22 11:04 -0500
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> - 2015-11-22 15:29 +0000
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-22 14:06 -0800
Re: just a curiosity about starting array indexing at 0 as opposed to 1 John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 07:49 -0800
csiph-web