« Exclusion of the lower bound forces for a subsequence starting at the smallest natural number the lower bound as mentioned into the realm of the unnatural num

« Exclusion of the lower bound forces for a subsequence starting at the smallest natural number the lower bound as mentioned into the realm of the unnatural numbers » There's a parallel argument for being inclusive in the upper bound: it lets you specify a range which is the entire size of your integer type. I can see that that might seem like a poor trade for losing the ability to represent an empty range starting at zero, but it seems a shame he didn't mention that this is the tradeoff you're making.