I'm familiar with NaN
being "weird" in JavaScript, i.e., NaN === NaN
always returns false
, as described here. So one should not make ===
comparisons to check for NaN
, but use isNaN(..) instead.
So I was surprised to discover that
> [NaN].includes(NaN)
true
This seems inconsistent. Why have this behavior?
How does it even work? Does the includes
method specifically check isNaN
?
from Why does [NaN].includes(NaN) return true in JavaScript?
No comments:
Post a Comment