"The 20th century ran from 1901 to 2000 inclusive" and other arguments for 0-indexing
-
-
Replying to @qntm
Weirdly, extending the Common Era backwards makes more sense. 0th century: -99 to 0 CE -1st century: -199 to -100 CE -Nth century: -NXX CE
3 replies 3 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @qntm
The alternative would be to declare "Century N" as the years 100*N to 100*N+99 inclusive. 2000 to 2099 is Century 20. Buuuuut—
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @qntm
—that would lead to the exact same problem in reverse for ancient years. Century -1: -100, -99, ..., -1 CE Century -2: -200, -199, ..., -101
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @qntm
What I'm saying is that we need a year negative zero, which would immediately precede year zero
2 replies 2 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @qntm
Century 20: 2000 to 2099 CE Century 1: 100 to 199 CE Century 0: 0 to 99 CE Century -0: -99 to -0 CE Century -1: -199 to -100 CE etc.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @qntm
All of those annoying off-by-one errors introduced by subtracting BCE years from CE years? They are now off-by-two errors. You're welcome
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
-
Replying to @qntm
I have been known to write "... + 1 + 1" in programs when accounting for multiple fencepost errors, just to avoid a magic number 2
2 replies 4 retweets 10 likes
Really this is like the 137,720,001st century. The ACTUAL 21st century was significantly more rad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_epoch …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.