https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=161974
--- Comment #12 from ady <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Robert Großkopf from comment #11) FWIW, my experience with LO 24.2 and 24.8beta1 on Windows is different than what you report. Actually, my experience is even different between these 2 branches. Moreover, the amount of decimals displayed under each condition (e.g. zoom level) varies, and it is not always "more decimals displayed when zooming-in", nor the opposite. I assume it varies according to some algorithm, which is what would need to be changed in order to improve the resulting behavior. Probably "improving" under certain conditions would make it worse for other situations. > When changing the font (here to DejaVu Sans) there are other levels, which > won't work. Zooming up seems not be touched for this font. Numbers were > shown every time. Which confirms what I posted in comment 10. > Bibisecting should start with simple > =247/210 in cell A1 Why exactly? What if the specific numbers give you one behavior, and testing with different characters (which, generally speaking, might imply different widths for each glyph using a non-mono-spaced font) shows a different behavior? Some proportional fonts would show the numbers _almost_ as mono-spaced, but it is not a rule at all. What if you tried (each on different columns): =1/9 =1/3 =1/7 =8/9 ...respectively, and with different fonts and font sizes (again, each on different columns)? And what happens when changing the cell format, instead of using General/Standard? AFAIK, the only way to make sure that the "###" is never displayed is to use the "Shrink to fit cell size" alignment. I would suggest simply using it. As a side note, alignment of numbers (e.g. for accounting) is _much_ more important than whether "###" is shown under some zoom level. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
