From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Charles Subject: Re: Suggested change to Manual 3.5.9 example table Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:32:15 -0400 Message-ID: <4FFE291F.2020301@verizon.net> References: <4FFD89AD.1030707@verizon.net> <4FFDFCD6.8040305@verizon.net> <8313.1342046771@alphaville> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54205) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sp8Gg-0005mw-3I for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:32:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sp8Ge-0005Dj-UD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:32:34 -0400 Received: from vms173001pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.1]:14066) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sp8Ge-0005Db-P0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:32:32 -0400 Received: from [10.0.0.2] ([unknown] [74.111.56.104]) by vms173001.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0M7000JJ8XLRHMBH@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net> for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 20:32:16 -0500 (CDT) In-reply-to: <8313.1342046771@alphaville> 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 On 7/11/2012 6:46 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: > suvayu ali wrote: > >> Hello Charles, >> >> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Charles wrote: >>> All I was trying to say that example should be corrected since it is >>> confusing. >> And here I was thinking you are asking about the format specifier! :-p >> >> Since you have already put in the effort to correct the table, how about >> submitting it as a patch to doc/org.texi? You could also take this >> opportunity to improve the text somewhat. :) >> > I replied to Charlie's original message but from the tenor of the replies here > I gather nobody saw my message? But I just checked gmane and it's there, so > I'm not sure any more: did anybody see it? Here's the message body again just > in case: > > Charles wrote: > >> I have searched the news groups concerning this and found nothing. >> >> I am attempting to learn the advance features for tables and could not >> understand 29.7 as the result for $at=vmean(@-II..@-I);%.1f. >> >> I copied the table and formulas into a scratch org file, changed the >> floating point to .2f and the result was 25.00, which I believe is >> correct. I changed it back to .1f and 25.0 was the result. >> >> Is the result as given in the manual supposed to demonstrate some >> concept that is not evident to me? >> > Good one. > > It *may* have been intended to illustrate the difference between rows > marked with # and unmarked rows; e.g. if you go back and change a grade > in Sam's row and press TAB, then the # rows are recalculated but the > unmarked one is not. So the 29.7 might have been a (now incorrect) > remnant of a previous calculation that would have been corrected in the > next global recalculation. > > However, if that's the case, a more extensive explanation would > certainly be welcome. > > Nick > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.2195 / Virus Database: 2437/5126 - Release Date: 07/11/12 > > Nick, I did read your reply. I thought you were suggesting the reason why the error occurred (which makes a lot of sense) and you were inviting further explanation from whoever drafted that section of the manual. As to submitting a patch - Thank you but I have to pass, even for such a tinychange. Downloading, installing and learning git is a project slated for later this year. Charlie