<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - MATCH with third parameter MatchType=-1 fails if the SearchVector is passed directly as the result of an array-formula." href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107459#c4">Comment # 4</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - MATCH with third parameter MatchType=-1 fails if the SearchVector is passed directly as the result of an array-formula." href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107459">bug 107459</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:jag@psilosoph.de" title="Wolfgang Jäger <jag@psilosoph.de>"> Wolfgang Jäger</a> <pre>(In reply to m.a.riosv from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=107459#c3">comment #3</a>) > I have done a new sample, where to seems the issue is the -1 for third MATCH > parameter. Ack. See subject. However, I wouldn't see the -1 as the issue but as a condition for its incidence. > But it happens with a modified 'Reference|Array SearchRegion', what I am not > sure it is allowed in the specification, at least explicitly. What do you think is the rationale for the alternative "Reference|Array" given in the type position for the parameter SearchRange. We shouldn't get deceived by the slightly misleading name. Parameter names are arbitrary basically. However, type names used somewhere should be defined in advance. In fact there is an issue with subchapter 4.10 of the document you mentioned. It reads as if "Array" is synonym with something like "Range" or "RangeReference". The implemented functions concerned accept Calculated Arrays anyway), and I assume this to be the intention of OpenDocument V1.2 part 2, too. A different interpretation would make powerless toys of some functions. Is there a draft for a next version of odf (recalc) concerning this?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>