Sorry for following up to myself again...

Ben Bacarisse <> writes:
>> ...  But I think that is an easier way (no code yet though!) unless
>> you are set on one particular enumeration: consider the triple as a pair
>> one element of which runs over the enumeration of pairs you already
>> have.

This algorithm has the disadvantage that the sequence is not any of the
usual "zig-zag" patterns.  Using numbers, for example the sums of the
triples are not monotonic:

*Main> take 30 $ map sum (pn 2 [1..])

That probably makes it a non-starter for you.


Reply via email to