Am I the only one who starts my point numbering with, 101, 1001, 3001, etc?
Seems like everyone else I've worked with always starts monuments with 100, topo at 1000, etc.
Maybe my brain is off, but I don't start counting at 0
You aren't the only one.?ÿ When I started at my current position, I was in the "100, 1000, 3000..." club.?ÿ The surveyor that occupied my current billet implemented the 101, 1001, 3001... policy.?ÿ
[Edit]?ÿ we use 1-100 for primary and secondary control, 101-1000 for stake-out points, 1001-??????? for field located amenities (boundary & topo).
I also start a string of point integers at one.?ÿ I've always attributed this to my work in telecommunications years ago working with telephone cable counts of the conductors.?ÿ Cable pairs were counted in binder groups of 25; like pairs 1-25, 26-50 or say 276-300.?ÿ The number zero always ended a count. ?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ
I don't see that it matters much, as either works in this application.
It's a big deal for computer programmers, as some languages do it each way for array addressing. The first element in an array in Fortran and some other languages is Farray(1) but in C or C++ it is Carray(0). It makes sense in that you are adding an offset to the base address, and the first element is at the base address so you add 0 offset to get it.
We had an argument on one project because of conflicting conventions, and ones side awarded the project leader a trophy as the #0 Programmer of the Year.
You're not the only one, I do that as well, and there are plenty of crews at our firm who do the same.
It always made more sense to me, but ultimately I don't care as long as the ranges are still correct...
I'm with you - I start at 1, not 0. I don't really understand starting at 100 or 101.
Me too. 101 etc
I recall the argument that the new millennium started on Jan 1, 2001, and not 2000. The logic was undeniable. It didn't matter.
For the record, I start at zero.?ÿ
The first year wasn't 0, it was 1. So 1-10 was the first decade; 1-100 was the first century; 1-1000 was the first millennium; 1001-2000 was the second. January 1, 2001 was the first day of the third. We are currently in the
.
The first year wasn't 0, it was 1.....?ÿ ?ÿ.....?ÿ ?ÿ.....?ÿ ?ÿ ...
2001 called. They want their argument back.
?ÿOK if it is 2022AD and that started when Jesus died at 1AD and before Jesus was 1BC what are all of the years numbered when he was alive?
Not just you.
I recall the argument that the new millennium started on Jan 1, 2001, and not 2000. The logic was undeniable. It didn't matter.
For the record, I start at zero.?ÿ
DON??T TAKE HIM YET LORD! WE AREN??T DONE WITH HIM YET!
@lurker Jesus was born in 1??December 25, 1AD. Was the day before December 24, 1BC? I??m not sure.
