Re: Re: Table questions

[Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>]

On Dec 19, 2006, at 23:28, Eddward DeVilla wrote:

> I know I use column swapping a lot.  I haven't got formulas down yet,
> but if I where to use them in a table where I'm liable to column swap,
> I'd probably use named columns.  (That's supported, right?)

Actually, column swapping is not the problem, and org-mode
supports it - the formulas stored in a TBLFM line will magically
change the $N references along with the swapped columns.  This
is possible because the calculations in org-mode tables are focused
on row formulas at the central use case.  An yes, named columns do
work as well.

For individual fields that you want to use in formulas, you can
name a field, or use a constant.

>  Row
> swapping would be trickier, but I don't do that much unless I'm
> sorting based on a field, and if I'm sorting, I don't think I'd do
> much more than ask for "$named_column one row up".

This is what I have started working on some time ago, but not
finished because I was not satisfied with the logics.
Maybe I'll get back to it.

>
> The ability to ask for a named column in a row relative to the current
> one might be reasonably safe without having to change formulas.
> Swapping rows could still bite the user if he didn't plan things out
> right.

Definitely.

- Carsten