https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151183
--- Comment #6 from Eike Rathke ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #1)
> OTOH, what Excel gives is also confusing: why "year 0" must mean 1900? If at
> all, DATE(6;1;1) should give 0006-01-01
That's not confusing, Excel simply
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151183
--- Comment #5 from Eike Rathke ---
There's not much we can do about this. If we changed the two-digits year input
window (for this function only) to 1900-1999 for a hard-wired Excel
compatibility then documents that rely on the user's
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151183
--- Comment #4 from Mike Kaganski ---
(In reply to m.a.riosv from comment #3)
Yes, you are completely correct: the mentioned setting is what the standard
calls HOST-NULL-YEAR.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151183
m.a.riosv changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miguelangelrv@libreoffice.o
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151183
--- Comment #2 from Mike Kaganski ---
Forgot to mention, that OP mentioned there, that the formula also worked "not
ideally", requiring them to change "days" constantly ("-1" or "-2"), so not
fixing a broken-by-design and non-working
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151183
--- Comment #1 from Mike Kaganski ---
OTOH, what Excel gives is also confusing: why "year 0" must mean 1900? If at
all, DATE(6;1;1) should give 0006-01-01, not something related to
HOST-NULL-DATE. Maybe use of HOST-NULL-YEAR here is more
