Calc vs. acaddins : where to put stuff.

[Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>]

Hi;

While digging around Calc I see some things that could be ordered better.

One change that I am considering is moving RAND() to the
Analysis scaddin and bringing the error erf() function in base Calc.

This has reasons of course: in the case of RAND() I want it in the same
file as RANDBETWEEN() so I can use them cleanly.. erf() is something
I would consider doing with Boost, and I don't want to have to link boost
into the scaddin for just one function.

There are probably other changes that can be done too. Just wanted to make
sure if there is some criteria to keep some function in or out of the base Calc
or in a scaddin.

Pedro.

Re: Calc vs. acaddins : where to put stuff.

[Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>]

Hi Regina;

Thank you for the explanations.

>________________________________
> Da: Regina Henschel 

>Hi Pedro,
>
>Pedro Giffuni schrieb:
>> Hi;
>> 
>> While digging around Calc I see some things that could be ordered better.
>> 
>> One change that I am considering is moving RAND() to the
>> Analysis scaddin and bringing the error erf() function in base Calc.
>> 
>> This has reasons of course: in the case of RAND() I want it in the same
>> file as RANDBETWEEN() so I can use them cleanly.. erf() is something
>> I would consider doing with Boost, and I don't want to have to link boost
>> into the scaddin for just one function.
>> 
>> There are probably other changes that can be done too. Just wanted to make
>> sure if there is some criteria to keep some function in or out of the base Calc
>> or in a scaddin.
>
>Long time ago Addin was used for those functions which are not available in a standard Excel installation, but need an addin installed in Excel. Another reason for Addin has been, to show, how own functions can be defined without integrating them directly into the interpreter (example ROT13). I have never done such thing and do not know whether it still works. But there are two issues about it, https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=101386 and https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=98149
>
>In the meantime Excel has moved the functions to the standard installation and most of these functions are specified in ODF. Besides the task to give a way to define own functions, there is no need for scaddin at all.
>
>So considering that all, I think, that at least all functions, which are defined in ODF, should go to the normal sc.
>

OK, I don't really want to move things around very much, plus these things have to be done in careful order.
I think I found a way to do what I need without moving things around so we will see.

I do prefer to ask around before doing real changes so bear with me ;-).

>I do not know, whether a move has any influence on opening old documents, which do not use the ODF namespace oc.
>
>I do not understand your comment on erf. The function erf and erfc are moved to rtl::math with https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=97091
>

What I see is that we are keeping in rtl::math a lot of things that the system usually provides. It's
good to have them there if they are going to be used in Addins but I am not sure the implementations
are actually too good. In the case of erf, I think anything related to the Normal Distribution is
absolutely critical and essential and I would have expected the implementation to be along with
the other stats functions.

TBH, I haven't even started to look at the stats stuff. I am very busy with other projects.

>You are considering far-reaching changes. Therefore I suggest to speak with Eike before doing it.
>

I am actually going very slow, I am surprised that no one had done these things already but then
I only looked at this after the pain of updating the ancient boost we were carrying.

Of course discussion with people that know this better is welcome and that's why I bring the
subject to the public lists. I suspect Eike is reading and that he will chime in if he notices my
sharp axe dangerously near his baby ;-).

Pedro.

Re: Calc vs. acaddins : where to put stuff.

[Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>]

Hi Pedro,

Pedro Giffuni schrieb:
> Hi;
>
> While digging around Calc I see some things that could be ordered better.
>
> One change that I am considering is moving RAND() to the
> Analysis scaddin and bringing the error erf() function in base Calc.
>
> This has reasons of course: in the case of RAND() I want it in the same
> file as RANDBETWEEN() so I can use them cleanly.. erf() is something
> I would consider doing with Boost, and I don't want to have to link boost
> into the scaddin for just one function.
>
> There are probably other changes that can be done too. Just wanted to make
> sure if there is some criteria to keep some function in or out of the base Calc
> or in a scaddin.

Long time ago Addin was used for those functions which are not available 
in a standard Excel installation, but need an addin installed in Excel. 
Another reason for Addin has been, to show, how own functions can be 
defined without integrating them directly into the interpreter (example 
ROT13). I have never done such thing and do not know whether it still 
works. But there are two issues about it, 
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=101386 and 
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=98149

In the meantime Excel has moved the functions to the standard 
installation and most of these functions are specified in ODF. Besides 
the task to give a way to define own functions, there is no need for 
scaddin at all.

So considering that all, I think, that at least all functions, which are 
defined in ODF, should go to the normal sc.

I do not know, whether a move has any influence on opening old 
documents, which do not use the ODF namespace oc.

I do not understand your comment on erf. The function erf and erfc are 
moved to rtl::math with https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=97091

You are considering far-reaching changes. Therefore I suggest to speak 
with Eike before doing it.

Kind regards
Regina