Hei again,

1. Pretty sure. :-). Any other way will not make any sense.
2. Impossible to say.
3. Agree with you, if you base the case that he would run this formula over
that many rows.

But i am sure that is not the case here. :-)

Best regards
Petter Bøhler

skrev:

Hello Fingerjob,

Sorry but I cannot agree he

1. Can we be sure that the OP wanted what we produced?

2. If yes: Which approach does the OP understand (better)?

3. Ok, your formula does not use a helper column but: It takes about
250 times more calculation time than my two formulas (tested with
FastExcel on 10,000 rows). In these cases I like to call the slower
approach a "runtime crime" :-)

SCNR,
Bernd