Re: [sc-dev] Regular Expressions in FIND()?

2008-09-29 Thread David King
does Calc permit regular expressions in the FIND() function? I think FIND doesn't, SEARCH does http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/How_Tos/Re gular_Expressions_in_Calc#Regular_expressions_in_Calc_functions David

Re: [sc-dev] Multiline formulae support

2008-07-31 Thread David King
I have been working on adding multiline formulae support Nice one - this prob comes up in the user forums quite often. One thing worth testing might be how it works when a user searches with regex. Can't see why it would be a problem, but looking for eg newlines is always thorny in Calc.

[sc-dev] Issue 88967: PROB, FORECAST functions: scalar evaluation of array parameter

2008-06-25 Thread David King
Hi Eike Following up here on your response to this issue. Thanks for looking at it. Say we have A1:C1 = {7|6|5} In cell A2 we enter, as an array formula: =PROB({5;6;7};{0.2;0.3;0.5};A1:C1) and, correctly, A2:C2 = {0.5|0.3|0.2}. Now in cell D4 we enter, as a normal (non-array) formula:

Re: [sc-dev] [Issue 90759] ZTEST not same as Excel

2008-06-18 Thread David King
I agree, NORMSDIST is OK. But ZTEST doesn't use it, but calculates all itself. It actually does use gauss() - which I assume is at the heart of NORMSDIST. GAUSS()=NORMSDIST+0.5 I think. Wouldn't it be more natural to calculate a real sigma than a variance? I mean sigma =

[sc-dev] [Issue 90759] ZTEST not same as Excel

2008-06-17 Thread David King
Moving discussion of this issue here, at Regina's request. Hi Regina The function ZTEST should depend on NORMSDIST. Therefore NORMSDIST has to be controlled and improved first. I'm afraid I disagree pretty whole heartedly :) NORMSDIST may or may not be more accurate in Excel, but in Calc it

Re: [sc-dev] [Issue 90759] ZTEST not same as Excel

2008-06-17 Thread David King
I only added the accuracy of the SD-algorithm into the discussion, because the naive single pass algorithm used inside the ztest routine may give very wrong results, I'm sure you are right - but perhaps this should be a separate issue that can indeed wait for a while? This separate

Re: [sc-dev] OFFSET in array formulae

2008-03-17 Thread David King
Hi Eike Thanks for the help. Effectively you're now trying to confuse the interpreter ;-) No, the cause seems to be that for the case of dimension arguments being given, internally always a range reference is returned. Didn't verify, but I think that returning a single reference for the case