https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125743
--- Comment #9 from Jim DeLaHunt <[email protected]> --- Thanks to Lupp, in the forum thread, for pointing me to <http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.html>, the "OpenDocument specification", v1.2, Part 2, which is apparently the authority on how Calc *should* behave. This is the sort of specification for which I was looking. My case, with some array values for normally scalar arguments, and a "0" parameter for "column", seems to be covered by <http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.html#__RefHeading__1017866_715980110>, section 3.3 "Non-Scalar Evaluation (aka 'Array expressions')", section 2.2.1: > 2.2.1) Functions returning arrays are not eligible for implicit iteration. > When evaluated in 'matrix' mode the {0;0}th element is used. We can quibble about what section 3.3 says about how Calc should behave, and how this differs from the way Calc 4.0.1 actually behaves. But the behaviour I was expecting in this issue was that functions returning arrays would be eligible for implicit iteration. The spec isn't giving me that. In that case, I think the specification for <http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.html#__RefHeading__1018424_715980110>, 6.14.6 "INDEX", and the "https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/How_Tos/Calc:_INDEX_function]documentation wiki for INDEX", and the OpenOffice Help for INDEX, are lacking. They should have some mention that a parameter value of 0 is not permitted in some circumstances. And, documentation for any other "function returning arrays" should have a similar mention. I would like to see a note like: > Note: when this function is used in an array formula context, and when one of > the [i]row[/i], [i]column[/i], or [i]area[/i] parameters are arrays instead > of scalar values, then neither the [i]row[/i] nor the [i]column[/i] parameter > is permitted to have the value 0. The function will not return the expected > array in this situation. And a similar note should be in the specification > and documentation for any other function returning arrays. However, that is beyond the scope of this issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the issue. You are watching all issue changes.
