View Single Post
  #9  
Old 04-11-2007, 12:58 PM
whisper's Avatar
whisper whisper is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Favorite beer: Hefewizen
Posts: 36,131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by no driver View Post
I was unaware of R1C1 style cell references before reading this paper. I'm not sure I get the usefulness of R1C1 over $A$1 style cell references. Can anyone comment from experience? If you use R1C1, do you use it all the time or only in certain circumstances? Do other people using your spreadsheets have a hard time reading/understanding/using your spreadsheets?
I use the R1C1 all the time. The R1C1 usefulness is pretty varied. First thing, its just a catesian coordinate system - so it can be pretty easy to explain to someone versed in math. Another is that formulas are not dependent on where they are located or what they are refering to. Third is that it makes programming easier. Plus, functions like *lookup and offset are so much easier to think about in the R1C1 world than the A1 world.

Lets say you wanted to do the Fibonnacci series in Excel. In A1 you put 1, and in B1 you put a 1. C1 would be A1 + B1, D1 would be B1 + C1, E1 would be C1 + D1 etc.

In R1C1 notation, R1C1 would have 1, R1C2 would have 1. In all the other cells, the formula would be RC[-2] + RC[-1]. If this formula is wrong in one of the cells, you can quickly scroll through the cells with the formula and look for a flicker where the formula changed and changed back.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.32783 seconds with 9 queries