On 11/14/2012 4:21 PM, Steven_Lord wrote:
> c{2, 3}(1, 1)
Well, I'll be... :)
I'd never found that and I guess I never would've. There's no
subsection in the documentation specifically on the nomenclature and
when I'd tried before I'd never found the (apparently only) one line
wherein it is actually mentioned...I hadn't caught onto the meaning of
the error being that the curlies had to be first (and my old eyes are to
the point I have a heckuva' time distinguishing them from plain old
paren's anymore... :( ) but had always (for like 10+ yrs) presumed it
just didn't like the second set of addressing tacked on since never
could find "multi-level indexing" in a search...
So, OK, I stand corrected and I could've used cells much more
efficiently than have in the past having finally gotten that can.
But I _still_ think not being able to general the cell references is a
mistake.
--![]()
> c{2, 3}(1, 1)
Well, I'll be... :)
I'd never found that and I guess I never would've. There's no
subsection in the documentation specifically on the nomenclature and
when I'd tried before I'd never found the (apparently only) one line
wherein it is actually mentioned...I hadn't caught onto the meaning of
the error being that the curlies had to be first (and my old eyes are to
the point I have a heckuva' time distinguishing them from plain old
paren's anymore... :( ) but had always (for like 10+ yrs) presumed it
just didn't like the second set of addressing tacked on since never
could find "multi-level indexing" in a search...
So, OK, I stand corrected and I could've used cells much more
efficiently than have in the past having finally gotten that can.
But I _still_ think not being able to general the cell references is a
mistake.
--