From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dieter Wilhelm Subject: Re: About range references in the spreadsheet Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:44:26 +0100 Message-ID: <877gmtrn05.fsf@urmel.duenenhof-wilhelm.de> References: <20130116232437.b04189ed2c42c927f16b8d1c@gmail.com> <878v7g6vhz.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87obgbcxdx.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <87ehh6iti9.fsf@urmel.duenenhof-wilhelm.de> <87vcae8vmv.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87txpy85ns.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60836) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U12rz-0006SC-Gl for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:44:39 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U12rv-0007kl-3t for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:44:35 -0500 Received: from mail-ea0-f172.google.com ([209.85.215.172]:53996) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U12ru-0007jd-Sp for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:44:31 -0500 Received: by mail-ea0-f172.google.com with SMTP id f13so1466166eaa.17 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:44:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87txpy85ns.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> (Eric S. Fraga's message of "Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:39:27 +1030") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Eric S Fraga writes: > Bastien writes: > >> Hi Xue, Eric and Dieter, >> >> dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de (H. Dieter Wilhelm) writes: >> >>> (I would avoid the ambiguous expression "column two" since it is a >>> relative specification) alternatively >>> >>> The TWO REFERENCES expand to a field range from the row above the >>> current row, starting with two columns to the left up to the current >>> column. >> >> Yes... but this is a bit long. >> >> I finally used this: >> >> @@-1$-2..@@-1 @r{in the first row up, 3 fields from 2 columns on the left} > > Concise and correct! I'm happy with this. Sorry but I don't understand "in the first row up". Maybe better: The (or a) row up, 3... Another grievance with such a terse description for me is although it may describe the end result - the range - correctly but does not take into account how the references at hand are working. But maybe I'm just picking nits here :-) What about such an approach: @@-1$-2..@@-1 @r{a range of 3 fields: a row up, from 2 fields on the left .. a row up} Dieter -- Best wishes H. Dieter Wilhelm Darmstadt Germany