We recently discovered that text2num() will happily convert the text entities "nan", "inf" and "-inf" to their corresponding floating point values. This leaves certain code open to fun exploits, as the normal practice to validate numeric input is to do "isnum(x) && !(x <= 0)" or whatever have you. The problem is that isnum(text2num("nan")) will return true, and if your numeric validation is done in a negating fashion, then this will happily pass nan, as every greater-than or less-than comparison against nan will return false.
The immediate workaround for this is to implement a isnan macro as follows:
"#define isnan(x) ( isnum((x)) && ((x) != (x)) )"
But this does raise the point that, despite having the floating point special values around (nan, inf, -inf), DM has no tools to actually identify these values. Which is mildly curious and leaves us with a bit of a hole in how we validate user input.
So, at minimum, it might be worth adding some form of procs to identify these special values. To be clear, I have in mind isinf, isnan, and also isfinite. It might also be swell if all of these returned false in cases where "isnum(x) != true", this way, 90% of isnum(x) validation could just be replaced with isfinite(x), which only really leaves you with sub- and supernormal numbers to contend with, but range checks shooouuuld be valid against those.
Jul 30, 1:27 am