> No, the whole point of Number.isNaN is to provide a definitively test for NaN number values which cannot be tested for in the usual way using ===.
Wat? This seems to be a good reason to allow `Object(NaN)` and use the NumberWrapper brand as it cannot be tested via the normal way of `myNaN !== myNaN`. On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <al...@wirfs-brock.com>wrote: > No, the whole point of Number.isNaN is to provide a definitively test for > NaN number values which cannot be tested for in the usual way using ===.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
