Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]()
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi All,
I'm writing a code to do list reconciliation, i.e., the code would cycle through one list of account numbers and look for a match in 2nd list and do some stuff if match found. The match always needs to be exact. I usually in my codes use the .find xlwhole method - something along the lines: dim r as long dim c as object set c=myrange.find MyVal, xlwhole ... if not c=nothing then r=c.row .... to get the row of the same account in the 2nd list. Currently users are using a worksheetfunction Match to do the same thing but just manually. So, I was about to substitute that manual practice with a code and use the .find instead of the appliation.worksheetfunction.match (or application.match) but before I do that I thought i'd rather check with experts here whether the .find xlwhole is in no way inferior to the Match(Range,Val,0) function currently utilized. The searched/matched values might be both Integers and also Strings (rather long ones - maybe 20-30 chars) - does the string lenght make any difference? Any considerations appreciated! |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
can i set a preference so files always open to my preferred zoom | Setting up and Configuration of Excel | |||
Is there a preferred protocol for alignment of numbers in a colum | Excel Discussion (Misc queries) | |||
Adjusting numbers to nearest preferred number | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
preferred method for summing | Excel Programming | |||
preferred app? | Excel Discussion (Misc queries) |