From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Loris Bennett" Subject: Re: Conditional in table formula with times Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 13:34:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87eh2wk5jw.fsf@hornfels.zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <871tywlxci.fsf@hornfels.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <864n3s97e5.fsf@somewhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39285) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGpJm-00087U-16 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:35:08 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGpJf-0005An-T7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:35:01 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:39811) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGpJf-0005Aj-MY for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:34:55 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WGpJd-0007nc-Dw for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 13:34:53 +0100 Received: from hornfels.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([160.45.11.110]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 13:34:53 +0100 Received: from loris.bennett by hornfels.zedat.fu-berlin.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 13:34:53 +0100 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 Hi Seb, "Sebastien Vauban" writes: > "Loris Bennett" wrote: >> I'm trying to keep track of total time spend at work, but I am having >> trouble with a conditional in table formula: >> >> | *Day* | *Came* | *Went* | *Worked* | *Required* | *Diff* | >> |------------------+--------+--------+----------+------------+----------| >> | [2014-01-06 Mon] | 8:00 | 17:00 | 09:00:00 | 00:00:00 | 09:00:00 | >> | [2014-01-07 Tue] | | | 00:00:00 | 00:00:00 | 00:00:00 | >> | [2014-01-08 Wed] | 8:10 | 16:30 | 08:20:00 | 00:00:00 | 08:20:00 | >> | [2014-01-09 Thu] | 7:55 | 17:05 | 09:10:00 | 00:00:00 | 09:10:00 | >> | [2014-01-10 Fri] | 8:00 | 17:05 | 09:05:00 | 00:00:00 | 09:05:00 | >> #+TBLFM: $4=$3-$2;T::$5=if($4 > 0,"8:18:00","00:00:00");T::$6=$4-$5;T >> >> Can anyone enlighten me as to why I get "00:00:00" in the first case? > > Not answering your question... > > Just wanted to mention that, for this type of task, you probably should > have a look at the "clocking" mechanisms (C-c C-x C-i and the like), and > use them to generate tables like the above, or bills for clients, etc. > > Using proper clocking brings you many advantages, whose main (IMO) is > the "clock check" feature, where you can check that you don't have > unintended clocking gaps during the day, nor clocking overlap... > > Best regards, > Seb I do already use clocking for certain areas of activity. However, I would need "nested" clocking, i.e. a clock for "at work/not at work" which I can clock into at the beginning of the day an out of at the end of the day and within that the ability to clock into to and out of various activities. Is that possible? Cheers, Loris -- This signature is currently under construction.