Best to you

I have this formulas :
=AND(COUNT(B1;B3;B5)<=1;COUNT(C1;C3;C3)<=1;COUNT(D 1;D3;D5)<=1;COUNT(E1;E3;E*
5)<=1;COUNT(F1;F3;F5)<=1)
An perfect equivalent for this formula is the next array formula :
=AND(MMULT(TRANSPOSE(ROW(B1:F5))^0,ISNUMBER(B1:F5) *{1;0;1;0;1})<=1)
in US formula sintax , and in my sintax :
=AND(MMULT(TRANSPOSE(ROW(B1:F5))^0;ISNUMBER(B1:F5) *{1|0|1|0|1})<=1)
________________________________________
Thanks to mr. Harlan Grove I get this formula , which mr. Harlan Grove
said it
is another perfect equivalet for the formulas above ; the new
equivalent is :

=AND(COUNT(MATCH(ROWS(B1:F5);TRANSPOSE({1;3;5}))= 1))

but this formula didn't work stil for me ; can anybody give me the
changes in this last formula
to get it work ?
Thanks very much for your time and knowledge

Any ideea here , please ? any sugestion is more then wellcome

Can be some changes of functions in this formula to
calculate it faster by excel 2003 application ?

Respectfully

You have been trying to get a replacement formula for some time, and
Harlan Grove gave one to you, which you now find to be slower because
it is an array formula. Can't you just accept that the one you started
with is the optimum one? You never did explain why you had to have an
alternative.

Pete

On Aug 1, 12:58*pm, ytayta555 wrote:
Can be some changes of functions in this formula to
calculate it faster by excel 2003 application ?

Respectfully

The first suggestion I will give you is that if you are replying to an
existing message you should quote enough of the existing message to put your
reply into context.

You may wish to read some of the advice available (either on the web or in
newsgroups) for new users of newsgroups.
--
David Biddulph

"ytayta555" wrote in message
...
Any ideea here , please ? any sugestion is more then wellcome