Number filter should not format NaN to empty string

[robatwilliams]

Possibly a matter of opinion, but I see formatting NaN to empty string to be hiding a programming problem that as a developer I'd like to be able to easily notice and fix.

Can it be considered to format NaN to "NaN"? This could possibly be opt-in behaviour, configured in some way.

[jeffbcross]

I'll leave this open in the Icebox milestone for discussion, although I don't agree that a filter is the right place to catch that a value is unexpectedly NaN. This filter's job is to make numbers look nice, or not be seen at all.

[pkozlowski-opensource]

Yeh, I agree with @jeffbcross that the point of a filter is to have a nice-looking numbers for the end users. NaN doesn't sound like a particularly useful info to be presented to the end-users.

On top of this it would be trivial to have a decorator around the existing number filter that would output NaN as NaN and delegate for the built-in Number filter for other values.

So my vote would be actually to close this one as won't fix since there is a easy way around it (and IMO decorator is better option that just adding another configuration switch).

[robatwilliams]

@pkozlowski-opensource, a decorator is what I've done. I'm happy with closing this, just wanted to bring it up for consideration.

[jeffbcross]

Thanks for the discussion, @robatwilliams and @pkozlowski-opensource. Closing issue.