On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Hagar Delest <hagar.del...@laposte.net> wrote: > Le 11/02/2013 05:57, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak a écrit : > >> I usually want things to just work. If an arbitrary value is used, and it >> is not brought to my attention, I may not be producing the answer that I >> really want. Not returning an error gives me a false sense of security. > > > That's precisely my point. As long as the software gives an answer, you > can't suspect a problem somewhere. > > Do we want Calc to give an answer even if it's wrong and make users angry > because Calc gave a wrong value? Or prevent him to spot a corner case (like > #DIV/0! does)? > Of course, it's much easier to say that it could break compatibility and > continue to give a nice politically correct value (1). > > Rob, you talked about the 1900 leap year, it's exactly the same: should we > continue providing a questionable value for the sake of compatibility with > old files (even if there are very few of them with this situation) and > compatibility with MS Office? >
But returning 1 for 0^0 is not wrong. It is not wrong mathematically. It is not wrong per the ODF 1.2 standard. -Rob > Hagar
