Re: [office-formula] MIRR

["Andreas J. Guelzow" <aguelzow@pyrshep.ca>]

I'll pick this one but the same applies to most other comments of this
type:

On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 11:07 -0500, Patrick Durusau wrote:
> MIRR lacks parameters, at least as we define them for other functions.
> 

In my copy, parameters are specified:
MIRR( Array Values ; Number Investment ; Number ReinvestRate )

Stating that "Values" are a bunch of values, "Investment" is the
investment rate and blablabla doesn't mean anything and doesn't define
anything either.

This function is defined by given a specific formula (with the little
problem that the lower case n and upper case N should be the same). I
would hope that all function definitions/descriptions would look like
the current 5.12.28 MIRR.

Andreas

> Correct to be consistent with the parameters solution generally.
> 
> Note that in the cases of "missing" parameters, it may be that the 
> "definitions" were recorded in the prose of "semantics." That may be 
> generally true. In any case, we need to solve the parameter issue 
> consistently.
> 
> Hope everyone is having a great day!
> 
> Patrick
> 

-- 
Andreas J. Guelzow <aguelzow@pyrshep.ca>