I’ve noticed a trend toward Julia’s new keywords trending towards using keywords and functions instead of integer indexing in Julia. For example, first(array) instead of array[1], or eachindex(array) instead of 1:length(array). Is this an intended aim for Julia style-- to avoid integer indexes in …

I don’t understand what is being asked exactly. [image] wherrera: Is this an intended aim for Julia style Not relying on hard-coded indexing makes code more general (can handle non 1-based index array) while improving the readability, so, win-win? (third win: sometimes this helps compiler to…

[image] wherrera: eachindex(array) This falls into a another, more important category as it ensures an ordering which is (the most) efficient for the passed in type, see Arrays · The Julia Language

You can also avoid indexing at all in many problems, just iterate the elements themselves. And why not!? Compare the following: [f(x) for x in myvalues] and [f(myvalues[i]) for i in 1:length(myvalues)]

Henrique said in his answer pointed to above: the decision ends up being mostly stylistic. I asked because am wondering if the preferred style in Julia is going to move toward the newer usage?

if you assume people prefer to write in win-win-win style instead of lose-lose-tie style, then yes.

I did not say it in the exact post I linked above, but three posts below, and the the context is: [image] Any shortcut to 1:length(myVector)? if the code is guaranteed to not change too much (i.e., will keep using Vector s and not making so many accesses) then the decision ends up being mostly s…

As a proponent of zero-based indexing, I strongly favor first[array] as a natural and intuitive way to express array[0] :wink: Don’t even mention the abomination that is array[1]. Hasn’t anyone read Dijskstra? Edit: Irony, joke, absurdity!

The distinction between the serial number of an element of an array and the offset of the element is well understood. Sometimes one is of use, other times the other one is more helpful. Just because Dijskstra made some boldly worded statements doesn’t mean his viewpoint is the only one that is valid…

How much can hard-coded indexing be avoided in Julia?

Internals & Design

Henrique_Becker February 20, 2021, 9:38pm 5

See this answer of mine.

1 Like

Topic		Replies	Views
Removing bounds checking for HPC - `--check-bounds=unsafe`? Julia at Scale performance , hpc , inbounds , bounds-check	51	1217	February 1, 2025
Why does `@inbounds` disable constant propagation? Internals & Design constant-propagation , inbounds	25	1761	January 20, 2025
When does @inbounds increase performance? Performance inbounds	14	1461	February 14, 2025
OffsetArrays, inbounds, and confusion Internals & Design indexing , arrays	53	4204	July 10, 2022
Bound checking in eachindex(x,y) in 1.7.3 Performance	2	285	July 6, 2022

How much can hard-coded indexing be avoided in Julia?

Related topics