OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

# office-formula message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [office-formula] DATEDIF (Section 6.9.2)

• From: Eike Rathke <erack@sun.com>
• To: office-formula@lists.oasis-open.org
• Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:29:25 +0100

```Hi,

On Wednesday, 2009-02-25 09:28:06 -0700, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:

> There is no day between DATE(1993;9;15) and DATE(1993;9;16), but the
> difference is 1.
>
> (I think we should use the difference, and not say "between".)

Will reformulate that.

> > =DATEDIF(DATE(1992;2;15); DATE(1993;9;15); "yd")
>
> yes that's what I meant.
>
> >
> > instead, that indeed lacks definition. Gnumeric's result is 212, so
> > calculates days in 1993 (non-leap year). The rule behind that seems to
> > be "take (non-)leap year of the second date", as
> >
> > =DATEDIF(DATE(1991;2;15); DATE(1992;9;15); "yd")
> >
> > results in 213 instead. Can someone confirm / deny?
>
> again even if we use the second (or perhaps later year) we should not

Seconded. What about the leap year question? Can Gnumeric and Excel
confirm that "leap year-ishness" is taken from the second argument?

Eike

--
Automatic string conversions considered dangerous. They are the GOTO statements
of spreadsheets.  --Robert Weir on the OpenDocument formula subcommittee's list.
```

PGP signature

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]