No. _. + 4 is not a NaN error. _ - _ is NsN error. This result should be _. with no error.
Henry Rich On 5/6/2022 5:55 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
Sure, but that's not prescriptive here. Here, we have a case where there is no result because _. (approximately speaking) gives an unhandled infinity as an unrecognized loop condition. My gut feeling is that this means that we should treat this as an example of a case where the result would be _. if we could compute it (which means that we should throw a NaN error). Thanks,
-- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
