498

submitted 6 days ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

81 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] jaark@infosec.pub 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I don't think my sanity can take all of these explanations.

Though I just spotted one that's worse than null being an object ..

typeof NaN
"number"

I mean, come on.. it's even in the fucking name!

Edit - fixed capitalisation in 'NaN'

[-] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago

Douglas Crockford has a whole chapter of these in his latest book. There's also this classic video.

[-] zea_64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 days ago

Number = IEEE-754 double precision float, which includes NaN, so it makes sense

this post was submitted on 17 May 2025

498 points (97.9% liked)

Programmer Humor

23417 readers

2287 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS