[FaceKicker]

> One thing that annoys me about closed ranges (and it's not much talked about) is that it is impossible to express the empty range: in python [i:i] is an empty range, while closed ranges always contain at least one element. That makes closed ranges strictly less expressive than half-open ranges, making often necessary to write special cases for zero-length.

In matlab/octave you can write an empty range as a(i:i-1). Not to say that that's at all elegant or aesthetically appealing, but it does work. But I 100% agree with the sentiment; one of my favorite things about using NumPy rather than matlab in my research code is the vastly superior indexing, in large part due to the fact that it's 0-based. matlab's indexing really is painful and off-by-one-error prone for doing anything other than a(1:n).

[ot]

> In matlab/octave you can write an empty range as a(i:i-1). Not to say that that's at all elegant or aesthetically appealing, but it does work.

I agree, it feels like an ad-hoc workaround (BTW, I didn't know that).

It kind of makes sense once you mentally reverse-engineer what Matlab is doing underneath, since ultimately the indexes are pointers, but from an abstract point of view there is no mathematical notation where the second endpoint of an interval is smaller than the first. If you go down that road, now you might ask what is (i:i-2) and so on.

[im3w1l]

http://planetmath.org/emptysum

Although I vastly prefer the zero-based variant.