[Bug 63054] New: An error in a calculational "thread" of an array function shouldn't affect other "threads"

[bu...@apache.org]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63054

            Bug ID: 63054
           Summary: An error in a calculational "thread" of an array
                    function shouldn't affect other "threads"
           Product: POI
           Version: 4.0.x-dev
          Hardware: PC
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: major
          Priority: P2
         Component: SS Common
          Assignee: dev@poi.apache.org
          Reporter: gallon.fizik@gmail.com
  Target Milestone: ---

Whenever in array mode, 
  a) operands are collected for an array function or 
  b) array function is evaluated, 
and an ErrorEval is encountered, an EvaluationException is thrown, and the
whole result is set to ErrorEval. This doesn't correspond to Excel behavior,
where calculations fall into separate "threads", so that an error in a "thread"
doens't affect other ones.

Example:
A |   B   | C |   D   |   E   |   F   |
1 | #N/A! | 2 |     {=A1:C1*A1:C1}    |
=======================================
expected      |   1   | #N/A! |   4   |
actual        | #N/A! | #N/A! | #N/A! |

A testcase:

@Test
public void elementwiseEvaluation() {
    Workbook workbook = new XSSFWorkbook();
    Row row = workbook.createSheet().createRow(0);
    row.createCell(0).setCellValue(1);
    row.createCell(1).setCellErrorValue(FormulaError.NUM.getCode());
    row.createCell(2).setCellValue(2);
    row.getSheet().setArrayFormula("A1:C1*A1:C1",
CellRangeAddress.valueOf("D1:F1"));

    workbook.getCreationHelper().createFormulaEvaluator().evaluateAll();

    assertEquals(CellType.NUMERIC,
row.getCell(3).getCachedFormulaResultType());
    assertEquals(1, row.getCell(3).getNumericCellValue(), 0);

    assertEquals(CellType.ERROR, row.getCell(4).getCachedFormulaResultType());
    assertEquals(FormulaError.NUM.getCode(),
row.getCell(4).getErrorCellValue());

    assertEquals(CellType.NUMERIC,
row.getCell(5).getCachedFormulaResultType());
    assertEquals(4, row.getCell(5).getNumericCellValue(), 0);
}

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org

[Bug 63054] An error in a calculational "thread" of an array function shouldn't affect other "threads"

[bu...@apache.org]

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63054

Yegor Kozlov <ye...@dinom.ru> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED

--- Comment #1 from Yegor Kozlov <ye...@dinom.ru> ---
The fix in bug #62904 fixed this issue as well. 

The test cases are in TwoOperandNumericFunctionTestCaseData.xls
The only case that fails is #NAME?, but that's the way POI handles unknown
names, it's not a problem in evaluation of array arguments.
When creating a spreadsheet manually you can set a cell formula to reference an
unknown name, e.g. =not_here
and WorkbookEvaluator will fail early with

java.lang.RuntimeException: Don't now how to evaluate name 'not_here'
        at
org.apache.poi.ss.formula.WorkbookEvaluator.getEvalForNameRecord(WorkbookEvaluator.java:771)
        at
org.apache.poi.ss.formula.WorkbookEvaluator.getEvalForPtg(WorkbookEvaluator.java:681)
        at
org.apache.poi.ss.formula.WorkbookEvaluator.evaluateFormula(WorkbookEvaluator.java:548)

it doesn't even make it to the evaluation code. 


Regards,
Yegor

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org