Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Hi all
Good day to everyone I have a excel sheet Column 1 is Department Column 2 is weightage Column 3 is rating of project Column 4 is filled with either 65% or 35% I want to sum product of column 2 and 3 based on conditions of column 1 and 2 Can someone share the logic how I can derive this |
#2
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Simply use sumif, and / or
|
#3
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Sumif is sum of selected values based on condition
Here I want to multiply column 2 respective weightage and column 3 respective ratings based on department. Some department 65% payment & remaining department 35% |
#4
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On Tuesday, 16 July 2019 04:01:30 UTC+1, TIMOTHY wrote:
Sumif is sum of selected values based on condition Here I want to multiply column 2 respective weightage and column 3 respective ratings based on department. Some department 65% payment & remaining department 35% Hi Isn't it just =B2*C2*D2 since column D contains the Percentage relevant to the Department. Column D could be a Lookup to a table of Departments and Percentages. |
#5
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Thank you Alan & Rover
I have searched on google and found out the formula =sumproduct(--(Range1,criteria1),--(Range2,criteria2),Range3,Range4) In this case Range3 & 4 are column 2&3 |
#6
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/17/2019 9:46 AM, TIMOTHY wrote:
Thank you Alan & Rover I have searched on google and found out the formula =sumproduct(--(Range1,criteria1),--(Range2,criteria2),Range3,Range4) =sumproduct(num(Range1,criteria1),num(Range2,crite ria2),Range3,Range4) I don't know who started this idiom of a double-negation operator instead...but it's a least confusing to read if nothing else and seems less efficient besides. -- |
#7
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/17/2019 9:46 AM, TIMOTHY wrote:
Thank you Alan & Rover I have searched on google and found out the formula =sumproduct(--(Range1,criteria1),--(Range2,criteria2),Range3,Range4) =sumproduct(num(Range1,criteria1),num(Range2,crite ria2),Range3,Range4) I don't know who started this idiom of a double-negation operator instead...but it's a least confusing to read if nothing else and seems less efficient besides. The double negative refs only negative values in the specified ranges. In other uses it forces a negative value. -- Garry Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org Classic VB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion |
#8
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/17/2019 3:20 PM, GS wrote:
On 7/17/2019 9:46 AM, TIMOTHY wrote: Thank you Alan & Rover I have searched on google and found out the formula =sumproduct(--(Range1,criteria1),--(Range2,criteria2),Range3,Range4) =sumproduct(num(Range1,criteria1),num(Range2,crite ria2),Range3,Range4) I don't know who started this idiom of a double-negation operator instead...but it's a least confusing to read if nothing else and seems less efficient besides. The double negative refs only negative values in the specified ranges. In other uses it forces a negative value. Not what I observed in the earlier cases wherein I was looking at how to do some fairly complicated similar things...extensive testing appeared to show it is simply what it is--a double negation that leaves the result unchanged. It was used by Klaus in his answers apparently to force a reference that without Excel did not return values. NUM() is much cleaner for the purpose. I'd surely be interested in seeing any reference that explains any other interpretation for the syntax--I was unable to find it anywhere in the documentation. -- |
#9
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
I'd surely be interested in seeing any reference that explains any other
interpretation for the syntax--I was unable to find it anywhere in the documentation. Yeah, you'll do better googling it. Try... using double negative in Excel formula I could be wrong about its usage in Excel just off using so many different spreadsheet apps/controls!<g -- Garry Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org Classic VB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion |
#10
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/18/2019 10:53 AM, GS wrote:
*using double negative in Excel formula "This method is mostly used in SUMPRODUCT formulas to convert the conditional arrays that evaluates to TRUE/FALSE into 1/0." Yes, that's exactly what N() is for...instead of the double-negative. I had forgotten the function name is just N instead of NUM, my bad on that part. -- |
#11
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Thank you dbp & GS
|
#12
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/18/2019 12:33 PM, TIMOTHY wrote:
Thank you dbp & GS You're welcome...eye-straining syntax like writing "--" just breaks my brain to try to look at. :) When there's a function for the express purpose to cast to numeric from other types, why wouldn't anybody use it boggles the mind--unless it is a relatively recent introduction into Excel which I wouldn't think likely. -- |
#13
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/17/2019 11:34 AM, dpb wrote:
On 7/17/2019 9:46 AM, TIMOTHY wrote: Thank you Alan & Rover I have searched on google and found out the formula =sumproduct(--(Range1,criteria1),--(Range2,criteria2),Range3,Range4) =sumproduct(num(Range1,criteria1),num(Range2,crite ria2),Range3,Range4) I don't know who started this idiom of a double-negation operator instead...but it's a least confusing to read if nothing else and seems less efficient besides. ERRATUM: The cast-to-numeric function is N(), not NUM(), sorry... =sumproduct(n(Range1,criteria1),n(Range2,criteria2 ),Range3,Range4) -- |
#14
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Noted,thanks
|
#15
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
"dpb" wrote in message
On 7/18/2019 12:33 PM, TIMOTHY wrote: Thank you dbp & GS You're welcome...eye-straining syntax like writing "--" just breaks my brain to try to look at. :) When there's a function for the express purpose to cast to numeric from other types, why wouldn't anybody use it boggles the mind I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. Just butting in ;) unless it is a relatively recent introduction into Excel which I wouldn't think likely. Indeed not recent, 97 if not earlier Peter T |
#16
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/19/2019 12:52 PM, Peter T wrote:
.... I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. .... How so? -- |
#17
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/19/2019 12:52 PM, Peter T wrote:
... I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. ... How so? Double unary is more direct; - the N() function has to evaluate and so carries that extra overhead. -- Garry Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org Classic VB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion |
#18
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/19/2019 12:52 PM, Peter T wrote:
... I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. ... How so? Double unary is more direct; - the N() function has to evaluate and so carries that extra overhead. I seriously doubt one could measure the difference in comparison to the rest of the function--and the two negation operations are probably as costly as the one store--in fact, good possibility the code boils down to the same thing in the end. One more function reference is in the noise level of the spreadsheet and (imo) the clarity of intent is far more important for maintainability of code going forward. MS gave you a function for the job, use it... :) -- |
#19
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
"dpb" wrote in message
On 7/19/2019 12:52 PM, Peter T wrote: ... I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. ... How so? Double unary is more direct; - the N() function has to evaluate and so carries that extra overhead. I seriously doubt one could measure the difference in comparison to the rest of the function--and the two negation operations are probably as costly as the one store--in fact, good possibility the code boils down to the same thing in the end. In typical usage yes of course the difference is trivial, both in terms of storage and efficiency. However repeated in many 1000s of cells where a sheet recalc can take seconds, or a simulation which could take miutes if not hours the difference could be significant. The "--" is a pair of operators, but the N calls a function which does a whole bunch of stuff only to replicate the double - One more function reference is in the noise level of the spreadsheet and (imo) the clarity of intent is far more important for maintainability of code going forward. Clarity is subjective. You happen to know what the rarely used N function does and when you see it know why it's there, great. But most don't, so might look it up but then it wouldn't explain its purpose in context. 'Personally' when making a similar formula and at first it fails, easier remember it needs the -- than the name of a function. MS gave you a function for the job, use it... :) Sure, if you want, but understand why it's needed. FWIW MS 'gave us' that function not because it was needed in Excel but for compatibility with Lotus 123 & Quatro Pro, at a time when they were both better products than Excel. FWIW I occasionally use the N to add a comment in a formula, eg =1+2 +N("one + two") Peter T |
#20
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/20/2019 4:34 AM, Peter T wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message On 7/19/2019 12:52 PM, Peter T wrote: ... I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. ... How so? Double unary is more direct; - the N() function has to evaluate and so carries that extra overhead. I seriously doubt one could measure the difference in comparison to the rest of the function--and the two negation operations are probably as costly as the one store--in fact, good possibility the code boils down to the same thing in the end. In typical usage yes of course the difference is trivial, both in terms of storage and efficiency. However repeated in many 1000s of cells where a sheet recalc can take seconds, or a simulation which could take miutes if not hours the difference could be significant. Possible, but I seriously doubt it would be able to be shown to be the bottleneck in any process. Would take a profiler to prove it to me. The "--" is a pair of operators, but the N calls a function which does a whole bunch of stuff only to replicate the double - .... Don't know how it's implemented, either. It is a function, but all it has to do is a fetch of the content. The operators have to eventually do the same thing -- the cell content is still the same logical or text or whatever it is; necessarily the operator also has to correctly deal with it inside its own code ("there is no free lunch"). If the use of a double negation is such a highly recommended functionality, it's interesting it never is mentioned as being needed or the manner in which one should cast the logical to numeric in the documentation for SUMIF() and friends where it seemingly is most prevalent. -- |
#21
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/20/2019 7:47 AM, dpb wrote:
.... If the use of a double negation is such a highly recommended functionality, it's interesting it never is mentioned as being needed or the manner in which one should cast the logical to numeric in the documentation for SUMIF() and friends where it seemingly is most prevalent. Of course, the underlying problem is that the Excel parse engine doesn't have sufficient intelligence in it to evaluate enclosing () so that one is forced to write the explicit cast operation in one form or the other. A "real" programming language doesn't need either... -- |
#22
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
"dpb" wrote in message
On 7/20/2019 4:34 AM, Peter T wrote: "dpb" wrote in message On 7/19/2019 12:52 PM, Peter T wrote: ... I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. ... How so? Double unary is more direct; - the N() function has to evaluate and so carries that extra overhead. I seriously doubt one could measure the difference in comparison to the rest of the function--and the two negation operations are probably as costly as the one store--in fact, good possibility the code boils down to the same thing in the end. In typical usage yes of course the difference is trivial, both in terms of storage and efficiency. However repeated in many 1000s of cells where a sheet recalc can take seconds, or a simulation which could take miutes if not hours the difference could be significant. Possible, but I seriously doubt it would be able to be shown to be the bottleneck in any process. Would take a profiler to prove it to me. I doubt it'd be a bottleneck either and not what I meant. The "--" is a pair of operators, but the N calls a function which does a whole bunch of stuff only to replicate the double - ... Don't know how it's implemented, either. It is a function, but all it has to do is a fetch of the content. The operators have to eventually do the same thing -- the cell content is still the same logical or text or whatever it is; necessarily the operator also has to correctly deal with it inside its own code ("there is no free lunch"). Calling N looks up the function, 'evaluates' the expression, special handling for text to retun a zero (-- would error), and no doubt more. At it's simplest all a - operator might do is flip the first bit, though here a bit more as it's to coerce the boolean to it's numeric value. Not a free lunch but cheap one! Sumproduct works with arrays, each element of the array is processed individually with N or --, so potentially there could be many N calls with only one apparant use of N If the use of a double negation is such a highly recommended functionality, it's interesting it never is mentioned as being needed or the manner in which one should cast the logical to numeric in the documentation for SUMIF() and friends where it seemingly is most prevalent. There are many ways to coerce the booleans, apart from -- and N, but I have never seen any one method "highly recommended" over any other. Way back the preference was for -- as it was demonstrably faster and could encroach on the nested function limit. I agree in typical usage not an issue so go for personal preference, but when stretching resources why not go for the most efficient. I wouldn't expect the following to take more than a second even in an old system but should be enough to illustrate: Private Declare Function GetTickCount Lib "kernel32.dll" () As Long Sub abc() Dim i&, t%, s$, f$ For i = 1 To 4 Select Case i Case 1: f = "N" Case 2: f = "1*" Case 3: f = "0+" Case 4: f = "--" End Select s = Replace("=SUMPRODUCT(#(A:A=1))", "#", f) t = GetTickCount Range("c1").Formula = s Debug.Print GetTickCount - t, f Next End Sub In my 2016/32 the 1* and 0+ results were about 25% slower than --, but N was 90% slower (more than I expected from memory). Bearing in mind most of the work of this simple formula is comparing the contents of a million cells and counting the matches, the N accounts for a disportionate amount of the work. Peter T |
#23
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/21/2019 6:20 AM, Peter T wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message On 7/20/2019 4:34 AM, Peter T wrote: "dpb" wrote in message On 7/19/2019 12:52 PM, Peter T wrote: ... I wouldn't want to discourage your use of the N function, however I would suggest others new this to consider using the 'double unary' as more efficient. ... How so? Double unary is more direct; - the N() function has to evaluate and so carries that extra overhead. I seriously doubt one could measure the difference in comparison to the rest of the function--and the two negation operations are probably as costly as the one store--in fact, good possibility the code boils down to the same thing in the end. In typical usage yes of course the difference is trivial, both in terms of storage and efficiency. However repeated in many 1000s of cells where a sheet recalc can take seconds, or a simulation which could take miutes if not hours the difference could be significant. Possible, but I seriously doubt it would be able to be shown to be the bottleneck in any process. Would take a profiler to prove it to me. I doubt it'd be a bottleneck either and not what I meant. The "--" is a pair of operators, but the N calls a function which does a whole bunch of stuff only to replicate the double - ... Don't know how it's implemented, either. It is a function, but all it has to do is a fetch of the content. The operators have to eventually do the same thing -- the cell content is still the same logical or text or whatever it is; necessarily the operator also has to correctly deal with it inside its own code ("there is no free lunch"). Calling N looks up the function, 'evaluates' the expression, special handling for text to retun a zero (-- would error), and no doubt more. At it's simplest all a - operator might do is flip the first bit, though here a bit more as it's to coerce the boolean to it's numeric value. Not a free lunch but cheap one! Sumproduct works with arrays, each element of the array is processed individually with N or --, so potentially there could be many N calls with only one apparant use of N If the use of a double negation is such a highly recommended functionality, it's interesting it never is mentioned as being needed or the manner in which one should cast the logical to numeric in the documentation for SUMIF() and friends where it seemingly is most prevalent. There are many ways to coerce the booleans, apart from -- and N, but I have never seen any one method "highly recommended" over any other. Way back the preference was for -- as it was demonstrably faster and could encroach on the nested function limit. I agree in typical usage not an issue so go for personal preference, but when stretching resources why not go for the most efficient. I wouldn't expect the following to take more than a second even in an old system but should be enough to illustrate: Private Declare Function GetTickCount Lib "kernel32.dll" () As Long Sub abc() Dim i&, t%, s$, f$ For i = 1 To 4 Select Case i Case 1: f = "N" Case 2: f = "1*" Case 3: f = "0+" Case 4: f = "--" End Select s = Replace("=SUMPRODUCT(#(A:A=1))", "#", f) t = GetTickCount Range("c1").Formula = s Debug.Print GetTickCount - t, f Next End Sub In my 2016/32 the 1* and 0+ results were about 25% slower than --, but N was 90% slower (more than I expected from memory). Bearing in mind most of the work of this simple formula is comparing the contents of a million cells and counting the matches, the N accounts for a disportionate amount of the work. So N() is poorly implemented... :) How much is actually just function overhead, can you tell in any fashion? I'm surprised(*); it really shouldn't be that bad at all... (*) Well, w/ MS one should learn to never be surprised. -- |
#24
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
"dpb" wrote in message
Private Declare Function GetTickCount Lib "kernel32.dll" () As Long Sub abc() Dim i&, t%, s$, f$ For i = 1 To 4 Select Case i Case 1: f = "N" Case 2: f = "1*" Case 3: f = "0+" Case 4: f = "--" End Select s = Replace("=SUMPRODUCT(#(A:A=1))", "#", f) t = GetTickCount Range("c1").Formula = s Debug.Print GetTickCount - t, f Next End Sub In my 2016/32 the 1* and 0+ results were about 25% slower than --, but N was 90% slower (more than I expected from memory). Bearing in mind most of the work of this simple formula is comparing the contents of a million cells and counting the matches, the N accounts for a disportionate amount of the work. So N() is poorly implemented... :) Er, depends, if you mean by MS I wouldn't say so, but if you mean used in cell formulas to the extent the N makes recalc noticably slower than it need be with -- than yes..:) How much is actually just function overhead, can you tell in any fashion? If the only thing the N does is serve as a wrapper for -- we could probably work it out. But pretty sure internally it does a lot more than simply that, in addition to any overhead of calling the function. What we could do is compare N to change the booleans to 0s & 1s v. -- only to coearce the booleans. In the example quoted above increase the loop from 4 to 5 and add an extra Case Case 5: f = "" Subtract the case-5 time from each of the case-1 and 4 times and should get a fair indication of the net cost of N and -- respectively. I'm surprised(*); it really shouldn't be that bad at all... Why surprised and why 'that bad'? Although end result is the same not comparing like with like. (*) Well, w/ MS one should learn to never be surprised. Sometimes for sure, though I don't see anything poor or unexpected with this one:) FWIW my results in a relatively modern 2016 and an old 2007 system 2016 2007 110 938 N 93 859 1* 94 845 0+ 63 720 -- 46 594 64 344 net N time 17 126 net -- time Peter T |
#25
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/21/2019 11:18 AM, Peter T wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message Private Declare Function GetTickCount Lib "kernel32.dll" () As Long Sub abc() Dim i&, t%, s$, f$ For i = 1 To 4 Select Case i Case 1: f = "N" Case 2: f = "1*" Case 3: f = "0+" Case 4: f = "--" End Select s = Replace("=SUMPRODUCT(#(A:A=1))", "#", f) t = GetTickCount Range("c1").Formula = s Debug.Print GetTickCount - t, f Next End Sub In my 2016/32 the 1* and 0+ results were about 25% slower than --, but N was 90% slower (more than I expected from memory). Bearing in mind most of the work of this simple formula is comparing the contents of a million cells and counting the matches, the N accounts for a disportionate amount of the work. So N() is poorly implemented... :) Er, depends, if you mean by MS I wouldn't say so, but if you mean used in cell formulas to the extent the N makes recalc noticably slower than it need be with -- than yes..:) How much is actually just function overhead, can you tell in any fashion? If the only thing the N does is serve as a wrapper for -- we could probably work it out. But pretty sure internally it does a lot more than simply that, in addition to any overhead of calling the function. What we could do is compare N to change the booleans to 0s & 1s v. -- only to coearce the booleans. In the example quoted above increase the loop from 4 to 5 and add an extra Case Case 5: f = "" Subtract the case-5 time from each of the case-1 and 4 times and should get a fair indication of the net cost of N and -- respectively. I'm surprised(*); it really shouldn't be that bad at all... Why surprised and why 'that bad'? Although end result is the same not comparing like with like. (*) Well, w/ MS one should learn to never be surprised. Sometimes for sure, though I don't see anything poor or unexpected with this one:) FWIW my results in a relatively modern 2016 and an old 2007 system 2016 2007 110 938 N 93 859 1* 94 845 0+ 63 720 -- 46 594 64 344 net N time 17 126 net -- time Peter T Not having internals to look at, I'll retire with the comment I can't believe it couldn't be optimized significantly. I'll continue to believe "--" is an ugly hack altho apparently given the how MS has implemented N() one that is understandable why it has ended up being adopted. Clarity in code is a prime goal; this is not the route towards that; it _looks_ more like obfuscation. I'm not an Excel user for the most part; only when forced and in trying to improve some complicated spreadsheets the organization for which was doing some pro bono work for needed a couple complex SUMIF() constructs I had trouble getting to work did I ever see the idiom. While I've coded for 40+ yrs, it stumped me as to "why?" anybody would write such thinking at first it was as GS's first answer seems to imply there's some magic meaning to the double-minus rather than just being a double negation serving to cast the logical to numeric. When I realized that was the point, seemed the next logical thing to do is to use the MS-supplied function for the purpose. For case such as I've got that aren't huge in magnitude; just overly complicated and very inefficient for their end purpose I'll continue with N() because I can remember what it does; I may or may not when come back to -- a year from now. And certainly no one in the organization would have a klew what it would mean and they too can look up the function in the function help list... In summary, your point is taken; I'm still surprised by the result and would consider it a poor quality of implementation issue on several levels. -- |
#26
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Thank you Peter, dpb, and GS
|
#27
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
"TIMOTHY" wrote in message
Thank you Peter, dpb, and GS Probably a bit more than you bargained for:) dpb is of course right clarity is important, particularly when coming back 6 months later. In typical use it's unlikely you'll notice any difference between N or -- (or similar) so go with whichever you prefer, but keep in the back of your mind if ever dealing with heavy calculation why they are not quite the same. More importantly understand why it's needed, namely because Sumproduct treats any non-numeric array elements (after resolving) as zero. That's useful for text but we want any False/True as numeric 0/1 Peter T |
#28
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
On 7/22/2019 6:25 AM, Peter T wrote:
"TIMOTHY" wrote in message Thank you Peter, dpb, and GS Probably a bit more than you bargained for:) dpb is of course right clarity is important, particularly when coming back 6 months later. In typical use it's unlikely you'll notice any difference between N or -- (or similar) so go with whichever you prefer, but keep in the back of your mind if ever dealing with heavy calculation why they are not quite the same. More importantly understand why it's needed, namely because Sumproduct treats any non-numeric array elements (after resolving) as zero. That's useful for text but we want any False/True as numeric 0/1 Peter T And, thank you for taking the time to actually do the timings...I'd never'uve thunk N() could be such a dog... -- |
#29
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
Sum product formula with conditions
Yes Peter
I got more than what I asked for. Got knowledge from experienced people |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Product Code and Product Description setup | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
I need a product key for my Trail product, 2007 Microsoft Office s | Setting up and Configuration of Excel | |||
Chose a product and update related product variables | Excel Programming | |||
Product - Conditions - Edited Results | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
Vlookup code product and to copy commentary with photo of the product in vba | Excel Programming |