Christian Moe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 4/4/12 7:17 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: > > James Harkins<[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Don't know if this is fixed in a later org update, but -- the online > >> org manual says that you can refer to table cells in the current row > >> or column using @0 and $0 respectively, but that's definitely not > >> working on my machine. > (...) > >> ** Broken: "Not in table data field" > >> | 1.0 | > >> | 2.0 | > >> | | > >> #+TBLFM: @>$1=vsum(@1$0..@2$0) > (...) > > Did this ever work? I've spot-checked back to 6.36c and I cannot find > > a release where it actually worked: assuming I haven't made a mistake, > > it seems to be an implementation oversight, rather than some patch > > specifically breaking the functionality. > > > > Nick > > > > I find that zero references do work, albeit not quite as one might be > led to believe by the manual. > > Agreed, it does not work in James' example. And agreed, the manual > seems to me to suggest, to the contrary, that `@1$0' should work. > Though it does also make clear that the `$0' is superfluous and can be > omitted, because when only the row is given, the current column is > taken as implied. So we all agree `@1' works. > > But consider the following example, which also works. Here is some > output from fitting a linear trend in Org-Babel/R. (I've shaved off > some decimals to fit this in an email.) Computing the TBLFM will round > the number in each cell to three decimal places. > > #+results: > | Record | Slope | ConfLower | ConfUpper | > |----------+--------------+--------------+--------------| > | GISTEMP | 0.0173837600 | 0.0133209130 | 0.0214466060 | > | HadCrut3 | 0.0158602890 | 0.0118664610 | 0.0198541180 | > #+TBLFM: @2$2..@>$>=@0;%.3f > > Try substituting `$0' for `@0', it works the same. @0 designates the > current row, and the current column is taken as implied. Ditto when $0 > designates the current column. However, `@0$0' will not work. >
Ah, OK - I'm blind: on rereading it, and retrying it, I see that it just pushes everything down to 0.000 - but that looks like a different bug to me, no? Nick > It would seem that either one of $0 and @0 on its own in practice > designates "the current cell". > > Also, I can't think of a situation where either would be needed to > designate a whole column or row respectively. > > > Yours, > Christian > > >
