https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=159544
--- Comment #14 from Buovjaga <[email protected]> --- (In reply to ady from comment #13) > (In reply to Buovjaga from comment #11) > > > Plot twist: if you do hard recalc twice with attachment 192832 [details], > > you get > > > > 3 > > 3 > > 4 > > The double hard recalc is only needed in certain versions (e.g. 7.4.3.2) / > commits, but not in later versions. > > IDK what's the reason for the need of a multiple hard recalc and why some > formulas' results change only after the second one, but it would still > suggest that there is not 1 but at least 2 items influencing the results of > these formulas. How these, in term, influence the identification of the > problem(s) and respective solution(s) for each, IDK either. Ok, I checked with linux-64-7.6 and the need for two recalcs stopped with e7897ce47e415e46eb36687f911a9a4b09ca6b8a crashtesting: crash in ScInterpreter::ScCountIfs It mentions "bodge this to fill in 0 for missing ranges" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
