Someone wrote:
I need a formula that will show percent change from the
pervious month, the one I came up with is =SUM((D19-B19)/B19)

This is just one example of many that use =SUM() unnecessarily.
Presumably =(D19-B19)/B19 is just as good, if not better
performance-wise.

Why is this "screwy" idea so pervasive, namely using SUM() to
bracket any arithmetic expression? Is there a lousy text on the
market that is giving misleading instruction? Is this perhaps a
carryover from requirements of ancient spreadsheet software
(e.g. Visicalc)? (Not as I recall.)

I know: I shouldn't care. But I hate to see people learn poor
programming technique.

All you say is true, "but", the important thing IMHO is that the person be
able to come up with a solution/formula that THEY can understand. So, if at
their particular level of expertize if they feel comfortable with the SUM(),
then so be it. Each of us needs a solution that solves our problem. It may
not always be the most efficient, or "best" solution, but is in such a form
that we can come back to it next month or next year and still understand it
and be able to edit it for our current needs. As we each use Excel more and
more, we eventually learn to do things "better".

Vaya con Dios,
Chuck, CABGx3






" wrote
in message ...
Someone wrote:
I need a formula that will show percent change from the
pervious month, the one I came up with is =SUM((D19-B19)/B19)

This is just one example of many that use =SUM() unnecessarily.
Presumably =(D19-B19)/B19 is just as good, if not better
performance-wise.

Why is this "screwy" idea so pervasive, namely using SUM() to
bracket any arithmetic expression? Is there a lousy text on the
market that is giving misleading instruction? Is this perhaps a
carryover from requirements of ancient spreadsheet software
(e.g. Visicalc)? (Not as I recall.)

I know: I shouldn't care. But I hate to see people learn poor
programming technique.

"CLR" wrote:
All you say is true, "but", the important thing IMHO is that
the person be able to come up with a solution/formula that
THEY can understand.

I disagree. Anyone who uses a function called "SUM" to do an
operation other than addition does not understand squat! At
least some people do something like SUM(A1+B1), which is not
quite so nonsensical.

Actually, in most cases, the (mis)user of SUM() did not sound
like an native English speaker. So the use of "SUM" might be
irrelevant to the (mis)user. They might think of "SUM" as
"compute ...".

But that really wasn't the crux of my question. I want to know
why so many people misuse SUM() in this way. I suspect that
someone (or some text) is misleading these people. If it is a
text, wouldn't it be nice to track down the publisher and let them
know that the author is .... (Expletives deleted.)

I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand what
they've done and be able to make alterations to it that work when maintenance
or extension of features is required.

What you are discussing is a matter of both knowledge of the language and
style.

As the people who "misuse" the language get more familiar with it and see
other functions or code implemented they will learn 'cleaner' ways of doing
things.

But for someone trying to be self-sufficient, having something that works
and that they can maintain is much more important than whether they did it in
great style or not. But that's just my opinion, and like coding styles, we
each have our own.

" wrote:

"CLR" wrote:
All you say is true, "but", the important thing IMHO is that
the person be able to come up with a solution/formula that
THEY can understand.

I disagree. Anyone who uses a function called "SUM" to do an
operation other than addition does not understand squat! At
least some people do something like SUM(A1+B1), which is not
quite so nonsensical.

Actually, in most cases, the (mis)user of SUM() did not sound
like an native English speaker. So the use of "SUM" might be
irrelevant to the (mis)user. They might think of "SUM" as
"compute ...".

But that really wasn't the crux of my question. I want to know
why so many people misuse SUM() in this way. I suspect that
someone (or some text) is misleading these people. If it is a
text, wouldn't it be nice to track down the publisher and let them
know that the author is .... (Expletives deleted.)

"JLatham" wrote:
I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
what they've done

You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
criticizing people for using SUM() in this "unorthodox" manner.
I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
not MAX() or MIN(), for example?

They "must" be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?

This is a "Genesis" question. Not "what is the meaning of life?",
but "where did life come from, in the first place?".

So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
the "universal" function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
imagine people writing expressions like "A1+A2+A3+...+A26"
long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).

And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
it is "logical" that they would apply it to all expression, I would
have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
(apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
=(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.

So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
that SUM() is the "best" way to write an expression for __some__
reason.

I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
cultural. This one has me stumped.

I think the problem is that many people approach their problems thinking
that if they want to get a solution, they need a function. If you are going
to do an arithmetic operation, then you need an arithmetic function, and SUM
is the only obvious example. IMO, it is because of this pervasive attitude
that anyone can pick up a spreadsheet and start using it without any
training. They may be able to do, but for most, it takes training to use it
properly, to understand properly its capabilities, and to avoid the
'obvious' pitfalls.

--
HTH

Bob Phillips

(remove xxx from email address if mailing direct)

" wrote
in message ...
"JLatham" wrote:
I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
what they've done

You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
criticizing people for using SUM() in this "unorthodox" manner.
I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
not MAX() or MIN(), for example?

They "must" be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?

This is a "Genesis" question. Not "what is the meaning of life?",
but "where did life come from, in the first place?".

So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
the "universal" function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
imagine people writing expressions like "A1+A2+A3+...+A26"
long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).

And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
it is "logical" that they would apply it to all expression, I would
have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
(apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
=(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.

So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
that SUM() is the "best" way to write an expression for __some__
reason.

I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
cultural. This one has me stumped.

" wrote
in message ...
"JLatham" wrote:
I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
what they've done

You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
criticizing people for using SUM() in this "unorthodox" manner.
I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
not MAX() or MIN(), for example?

They "must" be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?

This is a "Genesis" question. Not "what is the meaning of life?",
but "where did life come from, in the first place?".

So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
the "universal" function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
imagine people writing expressions like "A1+A2+A3+...+A26"
long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).

And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
it is "logical" that they would apply it to all expression, I would
have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
(apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
=(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.

So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
that SUM() is the "best" way to write an expression for __some__
reason.

I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
cultural. This one has me stumped.

I agree entirely with your question. The unnecessary use of SUM() annoys me
too, and the more often it is left unquestioned, the more we will see naive
users assuming that this is correct usage.

I will wait eagerly to see whether you get an answer as to where this
incorrect usage originated.
--
David Biddulph

I think that one of the first things people learn is how to add two cells:

=sum(a1+a2)

And if

wrote:

"JLatham" wrote:
I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
what they've done

You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
criticizing people for using SUM() in this "unorthodox" manner.
I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
not MAX() or MIN(), for example?

They "must" be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?

This is a "Genesis" question. Not "what is the meaning of life?",
but "where did life come from, in the first place?".

So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
the "universal" function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
imagine people writing expressions like "A1+A2+A3+...+A26"
long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).

And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
it is "logical" that they would apply it to all expression, I would
have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
(apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
=(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.

So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
that SUM() is the "best" way to write an expression for __some__
reason.

I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
cultural. This one has me stumped.

--

Dave Peterson

oops.

I think that one of the first things people learn is how to add two cells:

=sum(a1+a2)

And if =sum() works with addition, it's got to work with other operators. It's
the universal function for math.



wrote:

"JLatham" wrote:
I agree with CLR - the really important thing is that they understand
what they've done

You and CLR both misunderstand my original question. I am not
criticizing people for using SUM() in this "unorthodox" manner.
I am asking: whatever possessed anyone, much less __a_lot__
of people, to misuse SUM() in this manner? Why SUM()? Why
not MAX() or MIN(), for example?

They "must" be getting this idea from somewhere. Where!?

This is a "Genesis" question. Not "what is the meaning of life?",
but "where did life come from, in the first place?".

So far as I can tell, there is no way that anyone learning Excel
for the first time would, on their own, stumble upon SUM() as
the "universal" function for all arithmetic. On the contrary, I can
imagine people writing expressions like "A1+A2+A3+...+A26"
long before some kind soul tells them they can do SUM(A1:A26).

And if you suggest that once they learn of SUM() for that purpose,
it is "logical" that they would apply it to all expression, I would
have to disagree strongly. If we are assuming extremely little
(apparently almost no) understanding of formula design in Excel,
it is a huge leap from SUM(A1:A26) to SUM(A1-B1) (an oxymoron),
much less SUM((A1-B1)/B1), especially for anyone with so little
understanding of the language that they cannot imagine that
=(A1-B1)/B1 would do the same job.

So on the contrary, I suspect that someone has taught people
that SUM() is the "best" way to write an expression for __some__
reason.

I wish someone would tell me that reason. Honestly, I cannot
imagine one. And I am usually very good at ferreting out the
origin of misunderstandings of all kinds, especially linguistic and
cultural. This one has me stumped.

--

Dave Peterson

Just to let you know, if someone is relatively new to excel, and even
newer to using formulas, they could potentially be mislead by the help
guide in excel. When you go into the help file to learn formalas, it
does not bread down every math equation effectively. So the real issue
you seem to have seems to be with microsoft, and the way they develop
their help files. Important issue to bring up, considering they make
the software, but then again, if they answered every question in the
help file, who would need people like us.
Cheers,
Jason

The only thing worse is:

=+SUM((D19-B19)/B19)

<vbg

Biff

" wrote
in message ...
Someone wrote:
I need a formula that will show percent change from the
pervious month, the one I came up with is =SUM((D19-B19)/B19)

This is just one example of many that use =SUM() unnecessarily.
Presumably =(D19-B19)/B19 is just as good, if not better
performance-wise.

Why is this "screwy" idea so pervasive, namely using SUM() to
bracket any arithmetic expression? Is there a lousy text on the
market that is giving misleading instruction? Is this perhaps a
carryover from requirements of ancient spreadsheet software
(e.g. Visicalc)? (Not as I recall.)

I know: I shouldn't care. But I hate to see people learn poor
programming technique.