[sc-dev] Re: dev Digest 8 Aug 2007 18:57:14 -0000 Issue 599
Hi Eike, Have you tried the patch that I have attached (in issue 20496)? It would (really) be easier if we can comment on the changes required on the patch (I think). 1. +func( should also cause a formula input (exception for +number). 2. And w.r.t to the ++ - =++ its for the similarity with excel (and also + - =+). Regards, Muthu Subramanian Hi Muthu, On Tuesday, 2007-08-07 20:44:10 +0530, Muthu Subramanian wrote: To continue the discussions, I have attached the Comments from issue 20496 Are my comments/ideas acceptable or do they need changes? We'll see. To add to those comments: 1. We can keep the import/export the same (without the '=' additions) - this makes sure that only the 'keyboard input' is affected. Of course, data import should not be affected by this. the specification misses a lot of points like: 1. when should the arrow key act like 'reference input' and 'accept input' 2. Function inputing. Any other input than numbers should not be affected. People usually request the start formula input with '+' feature because they want to key in short equations on the number keypad without having to move over to the regular keyboard. a correction in spec: (preferred). 1. +number+number = =+number+number (note the '+' after '=') To make it easier for others to follow, it would be good to state why you prefer it this way. Currently I don't see a reason to keep the mathematical unnecessary extra + Eike
Re: [sc-dev] i20496 : Enhanced formula input
Hi all,
there is one thing I definitely want to avoid - at all cost: namely
converting non-formula input into a formula.
Lets say the user enters: +some_string
IF 'some_string' is NOT a valid formula, then:
A.) IF this would be converted to a formula, Calc would evaluate it
and display
#NAME?, #VALUE? or the like
So, the user has to *come back ANYWAY* and correct it, IF he
indeed wanted a formula.
B.) However, IF he did NOT want a formula, then he is forced to come back
and undo the formula changes back to non-formula
= these are 2 additional steps!!!
= AND actually the formula code would convert it back to formula
So, the user who wishes a formula does NOT pay any penalty IF the
ERROR-formula is NOT automatically converted to a formula (as he has to
correct it anyway, and after that it would be converted automatically),
BUT the user who does need the actual string pays a very high price (up
to the point that he cannot enter strings starting with + or -).
I do use extensively strings in my work, so I hope this gets fixed.
(including strings starting with mathematical signs: +, -, *). (') is
not an option because on various keyboards it is not easily accessible.
Sincerely,
Leonard
Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi Muthu,
btw, this would be sorted into the corresponding thread if you replied
on the original mail instead of some digest.. anyway.
On Thursday, 2007-08-09 13:55:13 +0530, Muthu Subramanian wrote:
Have you tried the patch that I have attached (in issue 20496)?
No, that issue went out of my sight until recently when it came to life
again.
It would (really) be easier if we can comment on the changes required on
the patch (I think).
I think we should first clarify the behavior we really want. Otherwise
talking about necessary changes to the patch is moot.
1. +func( should also cause a formula input (exception for +number).
If so, then any formula should be evaluated, not just +number or
+func( Doing so would evaluate +string input as a formula and lookup
whether string happens to match a defined name, and result in #NAME?
if it doesn't. Which is what Excel does.
2. And w.r.t to the ++ - =++ its for the similarity with excel (and also +
- =+).
Excel converts +number+number to =number+number and ++number
to =+number, but converts +name to =+name
Note that Excel does not convert single numbers like +1 or -1 but does
convert ++1 to =+1, --1 to =--1, +-1 to =+-1 and -+1 to =-1 (all without
any other trailing operators) which I find pretty disturbing.
Eike
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [sc-dev] i20496 : Enhanced formula input
Hi all, sorry for another post. Eike Rathke wrote: ... 2. And w.r.t to the ++ - =++ its for the similarity with excel (and also + - =+). Excel converts +number+number to =number+number and ++number to =+number, but converts +name to =+name Note that Excel does not convert single numbers like +1 or -1 but does convert ++1 to =+1, --1 to =--1, +-1 to =+-1 and -+1 to =-1 (all without any other trailing operators) which I find pretty disturbing. What is the purpose of '--1' = '=--1' --1 is really +1, so, IF someone is concerned with typing fast a formula, it defies my logic to enter '--1' instead of '1'. IF I do use somewhere '--1', than that is because I need the '--' preserved, and therefore I need it as a string. [converting to '=--1' would preserve the '--', BUT I question the applicability of a formula in this instance.] I have serious reserves in converting '--1' and '++1' into formulas. Maybe there should be an additional option where one can turn this on (beside an option to turn the formula thing completely off), but I am yet to convince that this is useful. [Or at least don't convert to formula IF the cell type is set to text!] I also fear, that when units (and strong typing) will be implemented in spreadsheets (a thing I predict from the research going in the field will come rather sooner than later), such automatic formula conversions will make life very hard. Sincerely, Leonard - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [sc-dev] i20496 : Enhanced formula input
Hi Leonard, On Thursday, 2007-08-09 20:51:26 +0300, Leonard Mada wrote: Excel converts +number+number to =number+number and ++number to =+number, but converts +name to =+name Note that Excel does not convert single numbers like +1 or -1 but does convert ++1 to =+1, --1 to =--1, +-1 to =+-1 and -+1 to =-1 (all without any other trailing operators) which I find pretty disturbing. What is the purpose of '--1' = '=--1' I don't know. As I wrote, I don't like the attempt to handle anything that does not involve at least two non-operator tokens (in the sense of numbers, names, ...) as formulas. I brought these Excel examples into play because Muthu argued that ++number should be converted to =++number because that would be what Excel did, which it doesn't. My examples are all cases where we should not follow Excel. Eike -- OOo/SO Calc core developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. SunSign 0x87F8D412 : 2F58 5236 DB02 F335 8304 7D6C 65C9 F9B5 87F8 D412 OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't send personal mail to this [EMAIL PROTECTED] account, which I use for mailing lists only and don't read from outside Sun. Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks. pgpdFiLnWIUNf.pgp Description: PGP signature
