PEP 276 Simple Iterator for ints (fwd)

[James_Althoff at i2.com]

David Eppstein wrote:
>I don't know how your set theory class defined the integers, but one
>possible way is equivalence classes of ordered pairs (a,b) (representing
>integers a-b) where a and b are naturals and (a,b) equiv (c,d) when
>a+d=b+c.  And then you have to worry about the set-theoretic definition of

>ordered pairs

Or, we could contemplate Russell's Paradox.

Or, not.  <wink>

Jim