https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153297
--- Comment #11 from ady <adylo811...@gmail.com> ---
FWIW, apparently the problem with the MATCH(1;AA2:AA400;1) function in 7.4.x+
(ATM) seems to be in how it reacts when the list is not really completely
sorted (e.g. ascending in this case).
1. If the list of values is {0;1;0;0...} (i.e. not ascending in its entirety),
the result of the above MATCH seems to be wrong (not "2"). The search/lookup
goes down to the end of the list (they are all zeroes/empty after the first
"1").
2. If the list is entirely ascending {0;1;2;3...} the result is correct ("2").
3. When initially loading attachment 185057, the MATCH function in $DOWN.A1 is
not recalculated, so it (still) results in "1" (=2-1).
4. On (hard) recalculation, the cell $DOWN.A1 is recalculated to 398 (=399-1).
5. Manually replacing $DOWN.A1 with a "1" brings the rest of the depending
cells' values to their original (non-empty) values.
For some reason, MATCH() fails when the lookup array is not actually sorted
according to what the third argument of MATCH() would expect. In theory, in
this case MATCH() should still find the (first) "1" located in $LIST.AA3
anyway, but it doesn't, just because the list is not entirely sorted.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
