Off by one error?
The article says:
- The subsectors and segs are both stored in sequential order. That is, the seg numbers in subsector 0 are 0 through N0 - 1 (where N0 is the subsector 0 seg count), the seg numbers in subsector 1 are N0 through N0 + N1 - 1 (where N1 is the subsector 1 seg count), and so on.
Surely the seg numbers are 1 through N0, not 0 through N0 - 1? Am I right?
- Looking at the SSECTORS lumps in DOOM2.WAD, I see that the "first seg" is systematically 0 (and the next subsector's first seg is systematically the first subsector's seg count), so I guess it's zero-indexed as tradition requires. --Gez (talk) 18:18, 28 June 2015 (CDT)