Thread by @lzsthw

Alright, some folks have real answers AND these real answers point out the next stupidity of JavaScript NaN. First up "it's an IEEE standard" is not a defense, but here's the one reply for the reasoning:

stackoverflow.com/questions/1565…

Now...if we're following IEEE then, nope:

1. The IEEE standard is *entirely* about Math equality of floating point numbers. There is *NOT* a specification of === since that's not a math thing, that's a JS thing, so they could have fixed it there.

== is IEEE, fine.

=== is what everyone actually needs.

Then:

2. The IEEE standard is about MATH with FLOATING POINT. So then why is a NaN used when you do parseInt() on a string?

Strings are not floating point. Int is not floating point. If the JS people defend with "IEEE standard" this returning NaN in this situation is a vioaltion.

3. *Nobody has to actually follow a standard*. I get so irritated by people treating standards as if they materialized out of nowhere from some ordained power instead of the reality:

A bunch of companies made this so they didn't have to change their chips from the 1950s.

4. Any time you see someone argue "math" you can point out they aren't doing math. parseInt on a string is not math so the standard doesn't apply. That's classic BS where they randomly use errors like TypeError on a bad URL, and that ruins the language's usability.

5. Finally, if a standard or the people working on it mentions "CRAY computers" it needs to be revisited. Once again, these are not clay tablets found near a burning bush. They're documents created by companies in the hope that the standards boost sales. Time to update it.