Hi Andreas,
On Friday, 2007-03-16 14:30:51 -0600, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
> BINOMDIST, EXPONDIST, GAMMADIST, HYPGEOMDIST, NORMDIST have an optional
> argument (in XL, gnumeric,...) to switch between cumulative and
> non-cumulative answers.
>
> Is there any reasonable justification why other ...DIST functions do not
> have the same switch (other than well XL picked that at random).
Not really..
> It would be easy to add this optional parameter to the programs.
> Mathematically, the cumulative distribution and the density are defined
> for all values of x, so there is no justification to have an constraint
> such as a <= x <= b. The answer outside that range should just be 0 (or
> 1 in the case of cumulative if b < x).
This is also what our current semantics describe.
> The question is now mathematically correct the function definitions
> should be.
Well, as correct, exact and detailed as possible. In this case I think
we don't miss anything, or do we?
Eike
--
Automatic string conversions considered dangerous. They are the GOTO statements
of spreadsheets. --Robert Weir on the OpenDocument formula subcommittee's list.
