David A. Wheeler wrote:
> > I propose that in such cases, the "Result" column should be in the form of an inline array, e.g., { 1; 2; 3 | 4 ; 5 ; 6}. I think it's important that we be consistent about the format, so that the tool can handle it.
>
> Generally I'm fine with that. However, it may get a bit confusing in
> case the function returns larger arrays as is the case with LINEST.
> There the current approach using separated cells gives a better
> overview.
I think our test cases should be small enough that it should be okay. The alternative approach doesn't work well when arrays are returned that are truly 2D, though.
> Would the tool handle hard line breaks (entered with
> shift+return) within the cell?
It doesn't handle EITHER approach yet. But I don't see why it can't handle that, when modified to do so. I can't think of a case where hard line breaks are needed for array returns; do you have one in mind?
--- David A. Wheeler
