Bug in Excel 2007 / XP?
-
Does someone has Office XP / 2007? I was told this version has a huge bug: inserting "=850 * 77.1" retuns 100000. Can anyone confirm this?
Same here...
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." - Rick Cook "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance." Ali ibn Abi Talib "Animadvertistine, ubicumque stes, fumum recta in faciem ferri?"
-
Does someone has Office XP / 2007? I was told this version has a huge bug: inserting "=850 * 77.1" retuns 100000. Can anyone confirm this?
Yes, it was in there, it is fixed with the latest office update, it's part of the display code, the actual cell value is correct - so depending calculations were correct, too, and it flew below the radar of unit tests.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Does someone has Office XP / 2007? I was told this version has a huge bug: inserting "=850 * 77.1" retuns 100000. Can anyone confirm this?
-
Does someone has Office XP / 2007? I was told this version has a huge bug: inserting "=850 * 77.1" retuns 100000. Can anyone confirm this?
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/09/26b.html[^]
Jon Sagara Once again, the conservative sandwich-heavy portfolio pays off for the hungry investor! *slurp* Oh, I'm ruined! -- Dr. Zoidberg .NET Blog | Personal Blog | Articles
-
Old :P
Yes, very old.
"Any sort of work in VB6 is bound to provide several WTF moments." - Christian Graus
-
Yes, it was in there, it is fixed with the latest office update, it's part of the display code, the actual cell value is correct - so depending calculations were correct, too, and it flew below the radar of unit tests.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Old and has been fixed.
WPF - Imagineers Wanted Follow your nose using DoubleAnimationUsingPath
norm .net wrote:
Old and has been fixed.
You sound like a Microsoft technical support executive.
Jemmy : Deadline? Pfft, a real programmer eats deadlines for breakfast. :P Mark: I thought real programmers ignored deadlines :sigh: Best wishes to Rexx[^]
-
Does someone has Office XP / 2007? I was told this version has a huge bug: inserting "=850 * 77.1" retuns 100000. Can anyone confirm this?
Just checked on mine and it happens :laugh:
"Any sort of work in VB6 is bound to provide several WTF moments." - Christian Graus
-
Yes, it was in there, it is fixed with the latest office update, it's part of the display code, the actual cell value is correct - so depending calculations were correct, too, and it flew below the radar of unit tests.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
it's part of the display code
Yes. I put in
=850*77.1into the A1 cell, it says100000However, when I put into A2,=A1*2, it does return131070, which is indeed850*77.1*2 = 65535*2."Any sort of work in VB6 is bound to provide several WTF moments." - Christian Graus
-
Does someone has Office XP / 2007? I was told this version has a huge bug: inserting "=850 * 77.1" retuns 100000. Can anyone confirm this?
It's an aborted attempt by Microsoft to see who's cheating by using Excel in a maths exam.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
Does someone has Office XP / 2007? I was told this version has a huge bug: inserting "=850 * 77.1" retuns 100000. Can anyone confirm this?
this.Bug==Bug.Report(Fixed);
“If we are all in agreement on the decision - then I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about.”-Alfred P. Sloan