software

Someone wrote:
gt; I need a formula that will show percent change from the
gt; pervious month, the one I came up with is =SUM((D19-B19)/B19)

This is just one example of many that use =SUM() unnecessarily.
Presumably =(D19-B19)/B19 is just as good, if not better
performance-wise.

Why is this quot;screwyquot; idea so pervasive, namely using SUM() to
bracket any arithmetic expression? Is there a lousy text on the
market that is giving misleading instruction? Is this perhaps a
carryover from requirements of ancient spreadsheet software
(e.g. Visicalc)? (Not as I recall.)

I know: I shouldn't care. But I hate to see people learn poor
programming technique.

All you say is true, quot;butquot;, the important thing IMHO is that the person be
able to come up with a solution/formula that THEY can understand. So, if at
their particular level of expertize if they feel comfortable with the SUM(),
then so be it. Each of us needs a solution that solves our problem. It may
not always be the most efficient, or quot;bestquot; solution, but is in such a form
that we can come back to it next month or next year and still understand it
and be able to edit it for our current needs. As we each use Excel more and
more, we eventually learn to do things quot;betterquot;.

Vaya con Dios,
Chuck, CABGx3
quot; gt; wrote
in message ...
gt; Someone wrote:
gt; gt; I need a formula that will show percent change from the
gt; gt; pervious month, the one I came up with is =SUM((D19-B19)/B19)
gt;
gt; This is just one example of many that use =SUM() unnecessarily.
gt; Presumably =(D19-B19)/B19 is just as good, if not better
gt; performance-wise.
gt;
gt; Why is this quot;screwyquot; idea so pervasive, namely using SUM() to
gt; bracket any arithmetic expression? Is there a lousy text on the
gt; market that is giving misleading instruction? Is this perhaps a
gt; carryover from requirements of ancient spreadsheet software
gt; (e.g. Visicalc)? (Not as I recall.)
gt;
gt; I know: I shouldn't care. But I hate to see people learn poor
gt; programming technique.
The only thing worse is:

= SUM((D19-B19)/B19)

lt;vbggt;

Biff

quot; gt; wrote
in message ...
gt; Someone wrote:
gt;gt; I need a formula that will show percent change from the
gt;gt; pervious month, the one I came up with is =SUM((D19-B19)/B19)
gt;
gt; This is just one example of many that use =SUM() unnecessarily.
gt; Presumably =(D19-B19)/B19 is just as good, if not better
gt; performance-wise.
gt;
gt; Why is this quot;screwyquot; idea so pervasive, namely using SUM() to
gt; bracket any arithmetic expression? Is there a lousy text on the
gt; market that is giving misleading instruction? Is this perhaps a
gt; carryover from requirements of ancient spreadsheet software
gt; (e.g. Visicalc)? (Not as I recall.)
gt;
gt; I know: I shouldn't care. But I hate to see people learn poor
gt; programming technique.
quot;CLRquot; wrote:
gt; All you say is true, quot;butquot;, the important thing IMHO is that
gt; the person be able to come up with a solution/formula that
gt; THEY can understand.

I disagree. Anyone who uses a function called quot;SUMquot; to do an
operation other than addition does not understand squat! At
least some people do something like SUM(A1 B1), which is not
quite so nonsensical.

Actually, in most cases, the (mis)user of SUM() did not sound
like an native English speaker. So the use of quot;SUMquot; might be
irrelevant to the (mis)user. They might think of quot;SUMquot; as
quot;compute ...quot;.

But that really wasn't the crux of my question. I want to know
why so many people misuse SUM() in this way. I suspect that
someone (or some text) is misleading these people. If it is a
text, wouldn't it be nice to track down the publisher and let them
know that the author is .... (Expletives deleted.)I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand what
they've done and be able to make alterations to it that work when maintenance
or extension of features is required.

What you are discussing is a matter of both knowledge of the language and
style.

As the people who quot;misusequot; the language get more familiar with it and see
other functions or code implemented they will learn 'cleaner' ways of doing
things.

But for someone trying to be self-sufficient, having something that works
and that they can maintain is much more important than whether they did it in
great style or not. But that's just my opinion, and like coding styles, we
each have our own.

quot; wrote:

gt; quot;CLRquot; wrote:
gt; gt; All you say is true, quot;butquot;, the important thing IMHO is that
gt; gt; the person be able to come up with a solution/formula that
gt; gt; THEY can understand.
gt;
gt; I disagree. Anyone who uses a function called quot;SUMquot; to do an
gt; operation other than addition does not understand squat! At
gt; least some people do something like SUM(A1 B1), which is not
gt; quite so nonsensical.
gt;
gt; Actually, in most cases, the (mis)user of SUM() did not sound
gt; like an native English speaker. So the use of quot;SUMquot; might be
gt; irrelevant to the (mis)user. They might think of quot;SUMquot; as
gt; quot;compute ...quot;.
gt;
gt; But that really wasn't the crux of my question. I want to know
gt; why so many people misuse SUM() in this way. I suspect that
gt; someone (or some text) is misleading these people. If it is a
gt; text, wouldn't it be nice to track down the publisher and let them
gt; know that the author is .... (Expletives deleted.)
gt;

quot;JLathamquot; wrote:
gt; I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
gt; what they've done

You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
criticizing people for using SUM() in this quot;unorthodoxquot; manner.
I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
not MAX() or MIN(), for example?

They quot;mustquot; be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?

This is a quot;Genesisquot; question. Not quot;what is the meaning of life?quot;,
but quot;where did life come from, in the first place?quot;.

So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
the quot;universalquot; function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
imagine people writing expressions like quot;A1 A2 A3 ... A26quot;
long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).

And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
it is quot;logicalquot; that they would apply it to all expression, I would
have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
(apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
=(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.

So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
that SUM() is the quot;bestquot; way to write an expression for __some__
reason.

I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
cultural. This one has me stumped.I think the problem is that many people approach their problems thinking
that if they want to get a solution, they need a function. If you are going
to do an arithmetic operation, then you need an arithmetic function, and SUM
is the only obvious example. IMO, it is because of this pervasive attitude
that anyone can pick up a spreadsheet and start using it without any
training. They may be able to do, but for most, it takes training to use it
properly, to understand properly its capabilities, and to avoid the
'obvious' pitfalls.

--
HTH

Bob Phillips

(remove xxx from email address if mailing direct)

quot; gt; wrote
in message news
gt; quot;JLathamquot; wrote:
gt; gt; I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
gt; gt; what they've done
gt;
gt; You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
gt; criticizing people for using SUM() in this quot;unorthodoxquot; manner.
gt; I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
gt; of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
gt; not MAX() or MIN(), for example?
gt;
gt; They quot;mustquot; be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?
gt;
gt; This is a quot;Genesisquot; question. Not quot;what is the meaning of life?quot;,
gt; but quot;where did life come from, in the first place?quot;.
gt;
gt; So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
gt; for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
gt; the quot;universalquot; function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
gt; imagine people writing expressions like quot;A1 A2 A3 ... A26quot;
gt; long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).
gt;
gt; And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
gt; it is quot;logicalquot; that they would apply it to all expression, I would
gt; have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
gt; (apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
gt; it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
gt; much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
gt; understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
gt; =(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.
gt;
gt; So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
gt; that SUM() is the quot;bestquot; way to write an expression for __some__
gt; reason.
gt;
gt; I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
gt; imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
gt; origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
gt; cultural. This one has me stumped.
gt;
quot; gt; wrote
in message news
gt; quot;JLathamquot; wrote:
gt;gt; I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
gt;gt; what they've done
gt;
gt; You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
gt; criticizing people for using SUM() in this quot;unorthodoxquot; manner.
gt; I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
gt; of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
gt; not MAX() or MIN(), for example?
gt;
gt; They quot;mustquot; be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?
gt;
gt; This is a quot;Genesisquot; question. Not quot;what is the meaning of life?quot;,
gt; but quot;where did life come from, in the first place?quot;.
gt;
gt; So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
gt; for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
gt; the quot;universalquot; function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
gt; imagine people writing expressions like quot;A1 A2 A3 ... A26quot;
gt; long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).
gt;
gt; And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
gt; it is quot;logicalquot; that they would apply it to all expression, I would
gt; have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
gt; (apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
gt; it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
gt; much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
gt; understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
gt; =(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.
gt;
gt; So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
gt; that SUM() is the quot;bestquot; way to write an expression for __some__
gt; reason.
gt;
gt; I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
gt; imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
gt; origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
gt; cultural. This one has me stumped.

I agree entirely with your question. The unnecessary use of SUM() annoys me
too, and the more often it is left unquestioned, the more we will see naive
users assuming that this is correct usage.

I will wait eagerly to see whether you get an answer as to where this
incorrect usage originated.
--
David Biddulph
I think that one of the first things people learn is how to add two cells:

=sum(a1 a2)

And if
wrote:
gt;
gt; quot;JLathamquot; wrote:
gt; gt; I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
gt; gt; what they've done
gt;
gt; You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
gt; criticizing people for using SUM() in this quot;unorthodoxquot; manner.
gt; I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
gt; of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
gt; not MAX() or MIN(), for example?
gt;
gt; They quot;mustquot; be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?
gt;
gt; This is a quot;Genesisquot; question. Not quot;what is the meaning of life?quot;,
gt; but quot;where did life come from, in the first place?quot;.
gt;
gt; So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
gt; for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
gt; the quot;universalquot; function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
gt; imagine people writing expressions like quot;A1 A2 A3 ... A26quot;
gt; long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).
gt;
gt; And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
gt; it is quot;logicalquot; that they would apply it to all expression, I would
gt; have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
gt; (apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
gt; it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
gt; much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
gt; understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
gt; =(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.
gt;
gt; So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
gt; that SUM() is the quot;bestquot; way to write an expression for __some__
gt; reason.
gt;
gt; I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
gt; imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
gt; origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
gt; cultural. This one has me stumped.

--

Dave Peterson

oops.

I think that one of the first things people learn is how to add two cells:

=sum(a1 a2)

And if =sum() works with addition, it's got to work with other operators. It's
the universal function for math.wrote:
gt;
gt; quot;JLathamquot; wrote:
gt; gt; I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
gt; gt; what they've done
gt;
gt; You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
gt; criticizing people for using SUM() in this quot;unorthodoxquot; manner.
gt; I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
gt; of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
gt; not MAX() or MIN(), for example?
gt;
gt; They quot;mustquot; be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?
gt;
gt; This is a quot;Genesisquot; question. Not quot;what is the meaning of life?quot;,
gt; but quot;where did life come from, in the first place?quot;.
gt;
gt; So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
gt; for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
gt; the quot;universalquot; function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
gt; imagine people writing expressions like quot;A1 A2 A3 ... A26quot;
gt; long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).
gt;
gt; And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
gt; it is quot;logicalquot; that they would apply it to all expression, I would
gt; have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
gt; (apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
gt; it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
gt; much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
gt; understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
gt; =(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.
gt;
gt; So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
gt; that SUM() is the quot;bestquot; way to write an expression for __some__
gt; reason.
gt;
gt; I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
gt; imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
gt; origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
gt; cultural. This one has me stumped.

--

Dave Peterson