It was just a statement of fact by someone who reads your responses as a
matter of course because I know they will be enlightening. And my initial
comment wasn't meant as criticism of your formula, but more as extra
information for someone who joined in suggesting that an array formula might
do it, but didn't actually offer one.

As for 2079, I don't know about you, but I think it is beyond my realm of
needing to worry about <bg

--
__________________________________
HTH

Bob

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 10:22:04 +0100, "Bob Phillips"
wrote:

I think your mind is far from simple Ron

--

Thank you.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is that different people think in
different ways. For me, in this kind of problem, it's easy for me to
think in
terms of arrays. And even if it is not the most efficient algorithm for
solving the problem, unless the database is very large, it will likely be
"good
enough" for now.

Your solution will certainly run faster, and will also not run into the
dreaded
"5 Jun 2079" problem in pre-2007 versions, as would my solution :-))
--ron