I am almost sure that I have also encountered the NaN thing with integers with some of them
That cannot be. NaN is a purely floating point concept.
It is the meaning ascribed to a set of bit patterns within the range of the 2**32 (float) or 2**64 (double) possible patterns that do not have a logical meaning when interpreted as floats or double respectively.
All the 2**32 bit patterns for 32-bit ints and all 2**64 bit patterns for 64-bit ints have a defined meaning. (Actually some of them have two defined meanings; one each for signed and unsigned.)
The point being, there is simply no purpose or scope for any integer bit-pattern to be defined as Not a Number.
In reply to Re^4: NaN output
by BrowserUk
in thread NaN output
by spikeinc
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |