[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-formula] Semantics
On 3/1/06, Eike Rathke <erack@sun.com> wrote: > > I realise that I may be playing a devil's advocate here a bit :) > What for? Those functions work on numbers, text isn't a number. I wish > all function parameters / operands to numeric operators would behave > like that.. Sounds a bit like someone being lazy -hum-. ;) Y'know, I think this could be considered that geeky approach, which we wanted to avoid. Do the users want to care about whether something that obviously must be a number, isn't a number due to it being in a text-formatted cell, or something like that ? > > Isn't this what OpenFormula has been doing so far ? With tests being > > adjusted for OOo to pass them and all ... > > Well, thanks for the flowers, but with the big player I wasn't referring > to OOo ;-) Well I think OOo's approach of formulas is staying compatible with MS Office, so hey. Of course, I could be terribly wrong. > I don't consider ignoring text in a range to be SUM'ed dirty. Not at > all. Even if the text is "3" ? > You're oversimplifying things. We have many areas where different > applications currently do not agree. Maybe. We'll surely get to discussing those. / Tomas
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]