Bug?: Table spreadsheet: Inactive dates

Bug?: Table spreadsheet: Inactive dates

[Daniel E. Doherty]

All,

I notice that in a table, I can use active timestamps, do arithmetic
with them, and get meaningful results.  However, if I use inactive
timestamps, I get different results.  I prefer the way active timestamps
work, since I can easily do date arithmetic with them.

The problem with active timestamps is that they pollute the agenda.
Imagine a table with 100 rows of timestammps, all the same date.

* Tables with dates
** Active timestamps
| Begin                  | End                    |     Days |
|------------------------+------------------------+----------|
| <2012-09-24 Mon>       | <2012-09-25 Tue>       |        1 |
| <2012-09-25 Tue 17:50> | <2012-09-25 Tue 19:37> | 0.074305 |
#+TBLFM: $3=@$2-@$1

** Inactive timestamps
| Begin                  | End                    | Days             |
|------------------------+------------------------+------------------|
| [2012-09-24 Mon]       | [2012-09-25 Tue]       | [-1, Tue - Mon]  |
| [2012-09-25 Tue 17:50] | [2012-09-25 Tue 19:37] | [0, 0, 321:1850] |
#+TBLFM: $3=@$2-@$1

It seems to me that they ought to behave the same, but I would normally
want inactiv timestamps when doing calculations.

Regards,

Dan

Re: Bug?: Table spreadsheet: Inactive dates

[Bastien]

Hi Daniel,

Daniel E. Doherty <ded-law@ddoherty.net> writes:

> I notice that in a table, I can use active timestamps, do arithmetic
> with them, and get meaningful results.  However, if I use inactive
> timestamps, I get different results.  I prefer the way active timestamps
> work, since I can easily do date arithmetic with them.

You can now (from the maint branch) use inactive time-stamps.

Thanks for reporting this,

-- 
 Bastien