Re: simple question about NaN and FP exceptions

[Axel Kittenberger <axkibe@...>]

> But the Lua way is to show the test for NaN explicitly your code.
> http://snippets.luacode.org/snippets/Test_for_NaN_75

Would it be too much compatibility breaking or performance impacting
to have NaN evaluate itself to boolean false instead of true by
default?

This would a) make NaN checking much easier, arithmetic operations
dont return 'nil' or 'false' anyway. b) NaN could be a wonderful
dropin for people wanting to say 'isset but nil' in a
first-class-value-way for tables/lists.

Kind regards, Axel