Hi Alan, On Sunday, 2008-03-23 16:29:48 -0500, Alan Jones wrote:
> It almost seems like a waste of effort to jump to 1024 columns. I was > curious what was the reasoning behind this push. Internal representation in data structures and algorithms accessing them. This change was quite easily doable, without introducing heavy performance penalties. > I assume if we don't see mention at this point chances are slim to none > that we will see 2^14 or 16,384 columns and 2^20 or 1,048,576 rows in OOo > 3.0? No, that won't be on the map for OOo3.0. > I do appreciate everyone's time and hard work on OOo and Calc. Thanks 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 the [EMAIL PROTECTED] account, which I use for mailing lists only and don't read from outside Sun. Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks.
pgp1C2is7Dyn1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
