Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Full Text Issue Listing
|Summary:||Chaining of multiple-operations gives incorrect results|
|Component:||ui||Assignee:||AOO issues mailing list <issues>|
|Status:||CONFIRMED ---||QA Contact:|
|Issue Type:||DEFECT||Latest Confirmation in:||---|
Description bhut_ooto 2009-06-21 13:52:25 UTC
When chaining multiple-operations, one multiple-operation function corrupts the result from another, leaving an incorrect value in the cells. * A1 := 2 ; A2 := 3 ; A3 := 5 * A6 := 7 * B1 := A2*A1 // (expect: 6; actual: 10) * B2 := B1 // (expect: 6; actual: 10) * B3 := MULTIPLE.OPERATIONS(B2; A2; A3) // (expect: 10; actual: 10) * B5 := B2 + B3 // (expect: 16; actual: 20) * B6 := MULTIPLE.OPERATIONS(B5; A1; A6) // (expect: 56; actual: 20) If you replace the equation B3 with its non-MULTIPLE.OPERATION() equivalent: * B3 := A3*A1 then all of the values come out as expected, after you trick Calc to recalculate everything (by hitting enter at each formula which has the wrong value). Testcase is attached.
Comment 2 Regina Henschel 2009-06-21 15:21:13 UTC
Created attachment 63114 [details] E11 and E12 should show the same result as B11 and B12 show the same result.
Comment 3 Regina Henschel 2009-06-21 15:27:48 UTC
Please ignore my attachment here, it belongs to issue 102980.
Comment 4 Regina Henschel 2009-06-21 16:04:51 UTC
It might be worse to discuss, whether it should be allowed, that Multiple.Operations has another Multiple.Operations in its execution tree. Nevertheless, a formula without macro should never change the content value of another cell.
Comment 5 rpadmanabhan 2009-09-18 03:30:11 UTC
Raji Padmanabhan 091709 Could not replicate the bug on Windows Vista in buikd 3.1. Followed the steps as given. Little more information is needed to determine how the submitter's non-Multiple operation is working fine only after removing the Multiple Operation. When I tried at different ways to execute this function, my non-multiple operation always returned the correct results.