+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

If changed array formula reduce ""\""\""\ - signs to #Missing, will it make ...

  1. #1
    Maria J-son
    Guest

    If changed array formula reduce ""\""\""\ - signs to #Missing, will it make ...

    I had earlier a array in a column with 200 rows, with a formula that pointed
    at a range of 200 rows that's mostly empty, making a lot of ""\""\""\ -
    signs for the bottom part of the array column (after F9 is pressed when
    formula is selected).

    The array formula is still in the range of 200 rows, but now the formula
    just point at currently 37 rows dynamic named range, instead of the 200 that
    is the maximum possible. Some ""\""\""\ - signs are still there in the
    array column, but only a few. In the 200 rows array column, there will be a
    lot of "#Missing" errors, and the question is if the array work faster now
    ....

    In Short:
    200 rows array = Formula --> 200 cells in one column
    200 rows array = Formula --> Dynamic named range max. 200 cells in one
    column, but now 37 cells used

    Can anybody tell me from this description, if the arrays work faster by
    this? It make also me understand better how arrays work and become execute
    in excel....

    (I bought FastExcel some days ago, and will be able to check this later, but
    it take a while to understand how to use it.)

    /Kind regards




  2. #2
    Tom Ogilvy
    Guest

    Re: If changed array formula reduce ""\""\""\ - signs to #Missing, will it make ...

    Without knowing particulars, I would expect an array formula that looks at
    fewer rows to be faster than an equivalent one looking at more rows.
    Howver, from a practical standpoint, if the difference isn't noticeable,
    then not sure it makes any difference.

    --
    Regards,
    Tom Ogilvy


    "Maria J-son" <NotEmail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:%23BhaVS7PGHA.140@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > I had earlier a array in a column with 200 rows, with a formula that

    pointed
    > at a range of 200 rows that's mostly empty, making a lot of ""\""\""\ -
    > signs for the bottom part of the array column (after F9 is pressed when
    > formula is selected).
    >
    > The array formula is still in the range of 200 rows, but now the formula
    > just point at currently 37 rows dynamic named range, instead of the 200

    that
    > is the maximum possible. Some ""\""\""\ - signs are still there in the
    > array column, but only a few. In the 200 rows array column, there will be

    a
    > lot of "#Missing" errors, and the question is if the array work faster now
    > ...
    >
    > In Short:
    > 200 rows array = Formula --> 200 cells in one column
    > 200 rows array = Formula --> Dynamic named range max. 200 cells in one
    > column, but now 37 cells used
    >
    > Can anybody tell me from this description, if the arrays work faster by
    > this? It make also me understand better how arrays work and become

    execute
    > in excel....
    >
    > (I bought FastExcel some days ago, and will be able to check this later,

    but
    > it take a while to understand how to use it.)
    >
    > /Kind regards
    >
    >
    >




  3. #3
    Maria J-son
    Guest

    Re: If changed array formula reduce ""\""\""\ - signs to #Missing, will it make ...

    Hi,

    I just tested it with FastExcel , and time was reduced with 40%. You're
    right Tom - but the interest is caused by precisely slow calculating, caused
    by complex array formulas and many cells to be calculated. Now I work to
    make the formulas more intelligent and not calculate more cells than
    nessecary.

    /Regards
    ..

    "Tom Ogilvy" <twogilvy@msn.com> skrev i meddelandet
    news:%236Fgw88PGHA.720@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > Without knowing particulars, I would expect an array formula that looks at
    > fewer rows to be faster than an equivalent one looking at more rows.
    > Howver, from a practical standpoint, if the difference isn't noticeable,
    > then not sure it makes any difference.
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    > Tom Ogilvy
    >
    >
    > "Maria J-son" <NotEmail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:%23BhaVS7PGHA.140@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >> I had earlier a array in a column with 200 rows, with a formula that

    > pointed
    >> at a range of 200 rows that's mostly empty, making a lot of ""\""\""\ -
    >> signs for the bottom part of the array column (after F9 is pressed when
    >> formula is selected).
    >>
    >> The array formula is still in the range of 200 rows, but now the formula
    >> just point at currently 37 rows dynamic named range, instead of the 200

    > that
    >> is the maximum possible. Some ""\""\""\ - signs are still there in the
    >> array column, but only a few. In the 200 rows array column, there will be

    > a
    >> lot of "#Missing" errors, and the question is if the array work faster
    >> now
    >> ...
    >>
    >> In Short:
    >> 200 rows array = Formula --> 200 cells in one column
    >> 200 rows array = Formula --> Dynamic named range max. 200 cells in one
    >> column, but now 37 cells used
    >>
    >> Can anybody tell me from this description, if the arrays work faster by
    >> this? It make also me understand better how arrays work and become

    > execute
    >> in excel....
    >>
    >> (I bought FastExcel some days ago, and will be able to check this later,

    > but
    >> it take a while to understand how to use it.)
    >>
    >> /Kind regards
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >




+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 1