On 2002-03-15 06:05, Anonymous wrote:
On 2002-03-15 03:39, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough.
I threw OFFSET in, I guess, to convey the idea of applying functions to dynamically computed ranges.
Aladin
You said :-
"You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough."
No - I don't think so,
=SUM(A:A) is not the same as =SUM(A2:A65536)
On 2002-03-15 23:39, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
On 2002-03-15 06:05, Anonymous wrote:
On 2002-03-15 03:39, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough.
I threw OFFSET in, I guess, to convey the idea of applying functions to dynamically computed ranges.
Aladin
You said :-
"You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough."
No - I don't think so,
=SUM(A:A) is not the same as =SUM(A2:A65536)
If A1 contains a number, they will not give identical results. The presupposition was/is that A1 holds a label (as it's often the case). If the presupposition holds, they will give identical results.
On 2002-03-16 00:11, Anonymoss wrote:
On 2002-03-15 23:39, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
On 2002-03-15 06:05, Anonymous wrote:
On 2002-03-15 03:39, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough.
I threw OFFSET in, I guess, to convey the idea of applying functions to dynamically computed ranges.
Aladin
You said :-
"You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough."
No - I don't think so,
=SUM(A:A) is not the same as =SUM(A2:A65536)
If A1 contains a number, they will not give identical results. The presupposition was/is that A1 holds a label (as it's often the case). If the presupposition holds, they will give identical results.
In the real world (as opposed to a classroom), I've found it inadvisable to make any such presumptions without ensuring that the user is made aware of them.
On 2002-03-16 00:53, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
On 2002-03-16 00:11, Anonymoss wrote:
On 2002-03-15 23:39, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
On 2002-03-15 06:05, Anonymous wrote:
On 2002-03-15 03:39, Aladin Akyurek wrote:
You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough.
I threw OFFSET in, I guess, to convey the idea of applying functions to dynamically computed ranges.
Aladin
You said :-
"You could also have posed the question:
Why not =SUM(A:A)?
Well, that's also good enough."
No - I don't think so,
=SUM(A:A) is not the same as =SUM(A2:A65536)
If A1 contains a number, they will not give identical results. The presupposition was/is that A1 holds a label (as it's often the case). If the presupposition holds, they will give identical results.
In the real world (as opposed to a classroom), I've found it inadvisable to make any such presumptions without ensuring that the user is made aware of them.
I agree, but I'm not excited. Lets change that "presumptions" to a more neutral word "qualifications/preconditions". One of the strengths of human cognition is that it does not qualify, more often than not, the actions it makes us to perform. If it would/should, it would become lost in thought evaluating zillions of preconditions/qualifications.
No. Let's not change it - let's leave it as your original word : "presumption".
Anyway, enough of this ********.
You are obviously not a person who is willing to admit that you made an incorrect statement of fact but would rather obfuscate the situation with laughable attempts at philosophical comments.
You will no doubt be pleased to know that my contribution to this exchange has now reached its conclusion.