You're not telling me anything (here) that I don't already know.
And what was there in your post that you thought that I didn't already know?
All I said was, you cannot get NaN from integer overflow. That was, is and always will be true.
How Laurent_R's misunderstanding came about is irrelevant; that it should be corrected isn't.
In reply to Re^8: NaN output
by BrowserUk
in thread NaN output
by spikeinc
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |