Re: Table cell refs with @0 or $0 are broken

[Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com>]

Christian Moe <mail@christianmoe.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 4/4/12 7:17 PM, Nick Dokos wrote:
> > James Harkins<jamshark70@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> Don't know if this is fixed in a later org update, but -- the online
> >> org manual says that you can refer to table cells in the current row
> >> or column using @0 and $0 respectively, but that's definitely not
> >> working on my machine.
> (...)
> >> ** Broken: "Not in table data field"
> >> | 1.0 |
> >> | 2.0 |
> >> |     |
> >> #+TBLFM: @>$1=vsum(@1$0..@2$0)
> (...)
> > Did this ever work? I've spot-checked back to 6.36c and I cannot find
> > a release where it actually worked: assuming I haven't made a mistake,
> > it seems to be an implementation oversight, rather than some patch
> > specifically breaking the functionality.
> >
> > Nick
> >
> 
> I find that zero references do work, albeit not quite as one might be 
> led to believe by the manual.
> 
> Agreed, it does not work in James' example. And agreed, the manual 
> seems to me to suggest, to the contrary, that `@1$0' should work. 
> Though it does also make clear that the `$0' is superfluous and can be 
> omitted, because when only the row is given, the current column is 
> taken as implied. So we all agree `@1' works.
> 
> But consider the following example, which also works. Here is some 
> output from fitting a linear trend in Org-Babel/R. (I've shaved off 
> some decimals to fit this in an email.) Computing the TBLFM will round 
> the number in each cell to three decimal places.
> 
> #+results:
> | Record   |        Slope |    ConfLower |    ConfUpper |
> |----------+--------------+--------------+--------------|
> | GISTEMP  | 0.0173837600 | 0.0133209130 | 0.0214466060 |
> | HadCrut3 | 0.0158602890 | 0.0118664610 | 0.0198541180 |
> #+TBLFM: @2$2..@>$>=@0;%.3f
> 
> Try substituting `$0' for `@0', it works the same. @0 designates the 
> current row, and the current column is taken as implied. Ditto when $0 
> designates the current column. However, `@0$0' will not work.
> 

Ah, OK - I'm blind: on rereading it, and retrying it, I see that it just
pushes everything down to 0.000 - but that looks like a different bug to
me, no?

Nick

> It would seem that either one of $0 and @0 on its own in practice 
> designates "the current cell".
> 
> Also, I can't think of a situation where either would be needed to 
> designate a whole column or row respectively.
> 
> 
> Yours,
> Christian
> 
> 
>