Exercise 2: Counting Iterations for range(1,8) vs range(1,9) — Possible Solution
====================================================================

WHAT THE PSEUDOCODE INTENDS
------------------------------
This chapter established that "for i = 1 to n" is standard textbook
convention meaning INCLUSIVE of n. For n=8, that means the loop is
intended to visit 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 - eight values total.

(a) PYTHON range(1, 8)
------------------------------
Python's range(start, stop) is exclusive of its stop value. range(1,8)
produces [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] - seven values.

    Iteration count: 7
    Matches the inclusive convention? NO - it silently drops the
    value 8, exactly the same off-by-one gap this chapter's own
    worked example demonstrated (there, n=5 dropped the value 5).

(b) PYTHON range(1, 9)
------------------------------
range(1, 9) produces [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] - eight values.

    Iteration count: 8
    Matches the inclusive convention? YES - this is the correct
    translation of "for i = 1 to 8 inclusive" into Python, since
    adding 1 to the intended upper bound compensates for range()'s
    own exclusive-of-stop behavior.

WHY THIS CONFIRMS THE CHAPTER'S OWN PATTERN
------------------------------
Both cases here follow exactly the same mechanism this chapter
verified with n=5: a direct, unadjusted translation of "1 to n" into
range(1, n) always produces one fewer iteration than the pseudocode
intended, regardless of what n actually is. The correct translation
pattern is always range(1, n+1) when the pseudocode's own convention
is inclusive - which is exactly what part (b) demonstrates.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
The answer states both iteration counts precisely, explicitly checks
each against the chapter's own inclusive-convention definition rather
than just reporting a count, and connects the general pattern (why
adding 1 to the stop value fixes the translation) back to the exact
mechanism the chapter's own n=5 example already demonstrated.