number in parentheses
 

I'd like to put a number in parenthesis.

i've seen that i can do the (#.#) or whever from the custom number tab in
cel format.

what i' concerned is that if i do the above an di enter 2, i get (2.) i
just want (2) but also what if i have say 2.5

i tried (#) but 2.5 gives me (3)

if i try to enter as text, i get an error asking to correct to number, then
it turns it negative.

why did M$ do this?

any help?

thanks

number in parentheses
 

On Thu, 10 May 2007 10:54:01 -0700, Mike
wrote:

I'd like to put a number in parenthesis.

i've seen that i can do the (#.#) or whever from the custom number tab in
cel format.

what i' concerned is that if i do the above an di enter 2, i get (2.) i
just want (2) but also what if i have say 2.5

i tried (#) but 2.5 gives me (3)

if i try to enter as text, i get an error asking to correct to number, then
it turns it negative.

why did M$ do this?

any help?

thanks

Would (2.0) be acceptable?

If so, then do (#.0)

Another option, if you do not need to limit the number of decimals, would be

(General)


--ron

number in parentheses
 

(General) works great.

I'm just wondering why (#) would be programed to be a "negative" number.

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote:

On Thu, 10 May 2007 10:54:01 -0700, Mike
wrote:

I'd like to put a number in parenthesis.

i've seen that i can do the (#.#) or whever from the custom number tab in
cel format.

what i' concerned is that if i do the above an di enter 2, i get (2.) i
just want (2) but also what if i have say 2.5

i tried (#) but 2.5 gives me (3)

if i try to enter as text, i get an error asking to correct to number, then
it turns it negative.

why did M$ do this?

any help?

thanks

Would (2.0) be acceptable?

If so, then do (#.0)

Another option, if you do not need to limit the number of decimals, would be

(General)


--ron

number in parentheses
 

On Thu, 10 May 2007 11:38:02 -0700, Mike
wrote:

(General) works great.

I'm just wondering why (#) would be programed to be a "negative" number.

Numeric values enclosed in parentheses is commonly used in financial (and
probably other) reports to indicate a negative value. (At least in the USA)
--ron

number in parentheses
 

Ron wrote on Thu, 10 May 2007 15:16:37 -0400:

?? (General) works great.
??
?? I'm just wondering why (#) would be programed to be a
?? "negative" number.

Another use of parentheses, especially in scientific data, is to
indicate the standard deviation, or sometimes probable error of
a number, eg. 10.5(2) would indicate an error of 2 in the last
quoted figure. I don't need the notation much these days but I
did manage rather clumsily to generate a text value by use of a
helper column in days gone by.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

number in parentheses
 

On Thu, 10 May 2007 15:56:22 -0400, "James Silverton"
wrote:

Ron wrote on Thu, 10 May 2007 15:16:37 -0400:

?? (General) works great.
??
?? I'm just wondering why (#) would be programed to be a
?? "negative" number.

Another use of parentheses, especially in scientific data, is to
indicate the standard deviation, or sometimes probable error of
a number, eg. 10.5(2) would indicate an error of 2 in the last
quoted figure. I don't need the notation much these days but I
did manage rather clumsily to generate a text value by use of a
helper column in days gone by.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

Interesting. Although, strictly speaking, I would not consider 10.5(2) as a
number, but rather as a shorthand representation of 10.5±2 or 10.5±2SD.


--ron

number in parentheses
 

Ron wrote on Thu, 10 May 2007 17:25:26 -0400:

?? Ron wrote on Thu, 10 May 2007 15:16:37 -0400:
??
?? (General) works great.
??
?? I'm just wondering why (#) would be programed to be a
?? "negative" number.
??
?? Another use of parentheses, especially in scientific data,
?? is to indicate the standard deviation, or sometimes
?? probable error of a number, eg. 10.5(2) would indicate an
?? error of 2 in the last quoted figure. I don't need the
?? notation much these days but I did manage rather clumsily
?? to generate a text value by use of a helper column in days
?? gone by.
??
?? James Silverton
?? Potomac, Maryland
??
?? E-mail, with obvious alterations:
?? not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

RR Interesting. Although, strictly speaking, I would not
RR consider 10.5(2) as a number, but rather as a shorthand
RR representation of 10.5±2 or 10.5±2SD.

True enough but ± has been considered old-fashioned and
imprecise for at least 30 years in scientific usage since it
seems to imply a non-existent limit to error :-)


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not