[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[O] Bug?: Table spreadsheet: Inactive dates
From: |
Daniel E . Doherty |
Subject: |
[O] Bug?: Table spreadsheet: Inactive dates |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Sep 2012 19:44:18 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.8 Emacs/24.1.50 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) |
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: address@hidden@$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: address@hidden@$1
It seems to me that they ought to behave the same, but I would normally
want inactiv timestamps when doing calculations.
Regards,
Dan
- [O] Bug?: Table spreadsheet: Inactive dates,
Daniel E . Doherty <=