On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: > On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 15:44:38 +0100 > RGB ES <rgb.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 2013/2/10 Hagar Delest <hagar.del...@laposte.net> >> >> > Le 10/02/2013 00:43, Rob Weir a écrit : >> > >> > Spreadsheets are used by businessmen and not only mathematicians. >> >> >> > >> > I think that very few mathematicians use AOO at all. >> > Even in the industry (in which I work for almost 15 years), MS Excel is >> > not used to perform high level calculations. Even the nice charts we can >> > see from complex tests are in fact exports from dedicated software that >> > just give the numbers and let MS Excel draw the chart with all the bells >> > and whistles needed (secondary grid, axis, legends, ...). >> > Real calculation is made with specific applications, often developed by >> > the companies to be sure they master the process. >> >> >> >> +1. I remember a conference (I'm physicist) on which one person presented >> charts made with excel. One of the senior scientist on the audience then >> said "you are masochist, don't you?" >> >> Regards >> Ricardo > > My thinking is the Calc should return the mathematically correct answer. > Consider a parallel case: suppose some other widely used spreadsheet was to > define Pi as 3 (following the Indiana Pi Bill, bill #246 of the 1897 sitting > of the Indiana General Assembly), ar to say that 2+2=5, should Calc follow? > No, we should be correct; it is open to anyone who doesn't like this to use > another application. >
We're discussing conventions, not facts. The value of Pi is a fact, not a convention. http://www.faqs.org/faqs/sci-math-faq/specialnumbers/0to0/ " This means that depending on the context where 0^0 occurs, you might wish to substitute it with 1, indeterminate or undefined/nonexistent. Some people feel that giving a value to a function with an essential discontinuity at a point, such as x^y at (0,0) , is an inelegant patch and should not be done. Others point out correctly that in mathematics, usefulness and consistency are very important, and that under these parameters 0^0 = 1 is the natural choice." So I'm in favor of "usefulness and consistency'" over pedantry. I think users and application developers would agree. -Rob >> > >> > - In 3.4.1, "=0 ^ 0" returns 1 >> >>> - In 4.0, as patched by Pedro (see issue), "=0 ^ 0" would return an error >> >>> - According to ODF, valid results are 0, 1, error >> >>> >> >> >> >> In other words, the results we were giving before were entirely valid. >> >> >> > >> > It just means that an acceptable shortcut was used. Giving 'error' would >> > be valid too (regarding the ODF compliance). >> > But I would not say that mathematics POV 1 as a result is valid. Even if >> > some tend to think that 1 is OK. >> > >> > >> > >> > Microsoft has gone decades with treating the year 1900 as a leap year. >> >> Should we? >> >> >> > >> > Agreed, who cares what MS Excel does? It should not dictate what AOO >> > should do. >> > >> > >> > >> > - We lose backwards compatibility if someone was relying on the fact that >> >>> OpenOffice returns 1 as the result of "=0 ^ 0" >> >>> >> >> >> >> Correct. The fact is we have returned 1 for this calculation for over >> >> a decade. Whether mathematicians think it is right or wrong (and they >> >> do not all agree), that is what we did. So changing it now has the >> >> potential to break real user spreadsheets. So this is a serious >> >> change. >> >> >> > >> > First, how many users would face such a problem when both the base and >> > exponent are null??? >> > Again, real maths are not done in spreadsheets. So it's very likely the >> > 0^0 cases would not break that many sheets and with an error, users will be >> > able to spot quickly the issue and adapt to prevent that situation to be >> > calculated. >> > >> > Second, and that's my main point here: you're angry about such a minor >> > change when you don't mind breaking the backward compatibility of the whole >> > extensions eco-system? See: http://www.mail-archive.com/** >> > a...@openoffice.apache.org/**msg00107.html<http://www.mail-archive.com/api@openoffice.apache.org/msg00107.html> >> > I'm lost about the priorities... and how end-users fit in your agenda. >> > >> > Hagar >> > > > > -- > Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie>
