Comment on Speaking JavaScriptparentComments−klibertp12yIt's actually part of some cryptic and ancient standard and is common for nearly all languages nowadays. I never cared about it very much, but here's the post on NaN semantics from someone who apparently designed the standard:http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1565164/what-is-the-ratio...−munificent12ycryptic and ancient standardCryptic and ancient?! IEEE 754 is the behavior implemented by the chip in the computer you're using to browser HN with right now.−saraid21612y"In current and common use" is not actually the opposite of "cryptic and ancient".−sitkack12yI get your point, but....Ancient it is not, and old isn't bad. Lots of deep thinking went into IEEE-754, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~wkahan/ieee754status/754story.ht... calculating with computers is hard work.
Comments
It's actually part of some cryptic and ancient standard and is common for nearly all languages nowadays. I never cared about it very much, but here's the post on NaN semantics from someone who apparently designed the standard:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1565164/what-is-the-ratio...
Cryptic and ancient?! IEEE 754 is the behavior implemented by the chip in the computer you're using to browser HN with right now.
"In current and common use" is not actually the opposite of "cryptic and ancient".
I get your point, but....
Ancient it is not, and old isn't bad. Lots of deep thinking went into IEEE-754, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~wkahan/ieee754status/754story.ht... calculating with computers is hard work.