Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't think it's explicitly wrong; I've seen both fib(0) = 1 and fib(0) = 0 before. Wikipedia shows:

   By definition, the first two Fibonacci numbers are 0 
   and 1, and each subsequent number is the sum of the
   previous two. Some sources omit the initial 0, instead 
   beginning the sequence with two 1s.


I think it's still wrong by that definition. I think it is just saying fib(1) is the first number, not fib(0). fib(2) should never be 2.

EDIT: Actually, I think you're right: it's just an index thing (do we start at 1 or 0) - I was confusing the index of 2 with the value of 2.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: