On 2026-02-15 16:14, Ihor Radchenko wrote: > Paul Stansell <[email protected]> writes: >> Here are some more examples of unexpected behaviour (with the first >> column giving the expected behaviour) >> >> |----+----+-----+-----+-----| >> | A1 | 1A | .1A | +1A | -1A | >> |----+----+-----+-----+-----| >> | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | >> | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | >> |----+----+-----+-----+-----| >> | 2 | 3 | 2.1 | 3 | 1 | >> |----+----+-----+-----+-----| >> >> It seems that, if the string used as the column name in the header >> begins with a number, the numeric part of the string is included in >> the sum. > > In other words, value handling in table formulas is not the same > with `org-table-sum'. > > Indeed, `org-table-sum' uses `org-table--number-for-summing'.
Confirmed, for our bug tracker. Thanks, -- Jacob S. Gordon [email protected] Please don’t send me HTML emails or MS Office/Apple iWork documents. https://useplaintext.email/#etiquette https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument
