https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125743
Jim DeLaHunt <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|4.0.1 |OOo 3.3 or older --- Comment #8 from Jim DeLaHunt <[email protected]> --- Thank you for the clarifications. >> why change the "version" field > >Look at the help for the field Version: >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/page.cgi?id=fields.html#version >"The oldest version of the software the issue can be found in." >As I know the function was never implemented in an other way, so it is "OOo >3.3 >or older" (OpenOffice.org before Apache OpenOffice). I had not read this definition. Thank you for showing me. Based on your understanding that the function was never implemented in another way, the correct setting is indeed "OOo 3.3 >or older". I have changed it back. > Expectations are not a bug of AOO. > A bug occurs if a function does not what it should do by the given > implementation. I agree. So what is important in this discussion is the specified correct behaviour for the function. I opened a forum post on this topic, "What is correct INDEX() behaviour in array context?" <https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=72871>. A valuable pointer there was to the specification for Apache OpenOffice's functions, <http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.html> (actually the related .odt file is authoritative). Specifically, the relevant sections seem to be: * 6.14.6INDEX <http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.html#__RefHeading__1018424_715980110> * 3.3Non-Scalar Evaluation (aka 'Array expressions') <http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.html#__RefHeading__1017866_715980110> There is also a helpful comment from forum ocntributor 'acknak', " think the problem with the bug report is that there is no clearly correct behavior. If you find a situation where Calc adds 2 and 3 to get 6, then obviously there is a problem, and the correct behavior is clear as well. I'm not seeing where that's the case here. Calc's behavior may not make sense but there's no way to say that it's wrong." I'm interpreting the situation as, Calc does not have a specification for correct behaviour of INDEX() returning a non-scalar value in an array expression context, and therefore the reported behaviour is not wrong. It may be unexpected or unsatisfactory, but it is not presently 'wrong'. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the issue. You are watching all issue changes.
