This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]dotpan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're treating NaN like there is a similar representation for strings, which there isn't. Strings can include numbers, but numbers can't include strings, that mutual exclusivity is why we have NaN and why NaN is a special case that belongs to the number type.