Yeah, indeed, and this makes a whole lot more sense. I can sympathize with the argument of the OP, but I wouldn't exaggerate its profundity either. The intent

Yeah, indeed, and this makes a whole lot more sense. I can sympathize with the argument of the OP, but I wouldn't exaggerate its profundity either. The intent was opaque enough for the OP that he got it completely wrong, and even under the OP's assumptions, the intent was still more opaque than necessary. Furthermore, you're still passing around `NaN`, which is sort of an analogue of passing around `null`. This example suggests that perhaps a better language construct ought to be used, like the `Option` type.