--- Comment #5 from Eike Rathke <> ---
(In reply to ady from comment #3)
> FWIW, I never typed either "General" nor "Standard" in the Custom Code box.
Maybe you don't, but it's a valid keyword like all others. One can define for


to suppress 0-values.

(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #4)
> A valid number format is "Foo 000 Bar" producing "Foo 001 Bar" for the value
> 1.
Bad example..

Foo 000 Bar

is _not_ a valid format code, the trailing r is not accepted because R is a
keyword in calendar date context (year in an implicit secondary (non-Gregorian)
if defined calendar) and can't be mixed with a fixed numbers format like 000.
Valid formats would be

Foo 000

only in a locale where neither F nor O nor OO are keywords (which luckily are
all ;p only OOO and OOOO would be in some), or

"Foo "000" Bar"

> If the user enters "Foo Bar" in the format code, which obviously is not a
> reasonable format since neither #, 0, nor ? is part of the code we may warn.

Foo Bar

displays "Foo Ba2024" for a date in the year 2024 ... while nonsense in this
example how would you like to distinguish a valid r年 in the ja-JP locale. You
don't want to come up with a bunch of tweaked by per locale special cases.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Reply via email to