[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-formula] Groups - basis-test.ods uploaded
"Andreas J. Guelzow" <andreas.guelzow@concordia.ab.ca> wrote on 09/27/2010 11:42:03 PM: > > Re: [office-formula] Groups - basis-test.ods uploaded > > Running this through Gnumeric I see 2 FALSE: G10 and G11 > Something not-tested but suspicious in Gnumeric is > =yearfrac(date(2010,2,28),date(2010,2,28),0) results in non-zero. > > These could be bugs in Gnuemric but OOo has also G10 and G11 as FALSE. > (OOo also has several FALSE for basis 1.) > > I don't have Excel to try... > > Andreas > G10 and G11 are both tests of Procedure A, step 6: 6. If both date1 and date2 are the last day of February, change both dates to the 30th of the month. Excel appears to follow this rule, at least when I test it with Excel 2003. And remember, we don't have many great choices on how we define these functions. Ideally we'd use some authoritative reference to define these calculations. But I have been unable to come up with any. The official references are vague on the precise details, especially around leap year treatment. So our options are: 1) Use official, but vague definitions and leave the details to be "implementation-defined" 2) Define the precise behavior on our own, based on what seems logical and consistent to us, regardless of what implementations do. 3) Define different date basis values to match each implementation's existing calculations. "Everyone wins...except the user" 4) Mimic what Excel does. I don't love any of these choices, but the work to date on the financial calculations has been aligned with goal #4. -Rob
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]