MAX() is presumably acting as intended, and I'm not seeing anything in the built-in functions to support this behavior. So, unless I'm missing something, I guess this bug report is to request something like an MAPPLY() function, which would allow a non-array supporting function to be passed in by name (perhaps as a string) along with an array, and would apply the function to each array element individually.

Or alternatively a whole bunch of MMAX, MMIN, etc. functions.

=SUM(IF({-10;10;20;30}>0;{-10;10;20;30}))

close with ctrl+shift+enter

Thank you for the suggestion. Unfortunately it suffers from two issues:

First, repeating the expression that creates the array violates the DRY principal, which makes it error prone, verbose and more difficult to write, read or edit. In particular, consider the consequence of repeating the expression that generates the array if it is complicated and contains multiple nested function calls.

Secand, it only solves my overly simplistic example because the example clamps to zero. Even a slightly more general case of clamping, say, clamping below 25, doesn't work with this approach.

But let's not get too off in the weeds trying to solve a specific example.

Please treat this bug report as an enhancement request to add new capabilities as described in the bug summary. And please treat comment 0 and comment 1 as contributing just one specific usecase that would benefit from the requested enhancement, not as a specific problem to solve for me personally.

Let me be more specific about my request for enhancement, at least as a starting point. How about adding a new function, "MAPPLY", to apply another function to the individual elements of a list/matrix and return a list/matrix of the same dimensions.

Syntax:

MAPPLY(Array; FunctionName; Arg 1 [; Arg 2;][...;[Arg 255]])

"FunctionName" is the name of a function, as a string. The Arg arguments are either a value, or else the special string "*". Just before FunctionName is applied to the value of an element of the array/matrix, the special string "*" is converted to the value of that element. FunctionName is then be invoked with the Arg arguments passed in the order in which they are specified to MAPPLY.

A formula like
=SUMPRODUCT({-10;10;20;30};CURRENT()>0)
seems to work as you expect, looking simple.

Don't expect a function like you want implemented, there are enough functions pending to develop for compatibility with Excel.

[OT]

(In reply to m.a.riosv from comment #6)
> =SUMPRODUCT({-10;10;20;30};CURRENT()>0)

@Jonathan Watt,

JIC, FYI, SUMPRODUCT() is already an array function that does not require CSE, so the formula that Miguel presented in comment 6 should be introduced with a simple [ENTER].

(In reply to m.a.riosv from comment #6)
> A formula like
> =SUMPRODUCT({-10;10;20;30};CURRENT()>0)
> seems to work as you expect, looking simple.

Gosh, I hadn't thought to use CURRENT in this scenario. Very interesting that that works. (I assume it creates an array of boolean values, but the Function Wizard just shows "Err:518" -- despite it working -- so I can't be sure.)

> Don't expect a function like you want implemented, there are enough
> functions pending to develop for compatibility with Excel.

Missing Excel functionality does indeed seem like it would be higher priority. Thanks for the expectation setting.

Please feel free to close this as WONTFIX or something if you think that this request will just be bug clutter with no real prospect of ever being implemented.

(In reply to ady from comment #7)
> JIC, FYI, SUMPRODUCT() is already an array function that does not require
> CSE, so the formula that Miguel presented in comment 6 should be introduced
> with a simple [ENTER].

Thanks for the clarification.

(In reply to Jonathan Watt from comment #8)
> Function Wizard just shows "Err:518" -- despite it working -- so I can't be
> sure.)

Err:518 means UnknownStackVariable, which would seem somewhat reasonable when there is still no CURRENT() value (in the F.W.).

There are enhancement requests opened for years. There is no way to know beforehand _when_ someone will take care of it, if ever. Closing it as WF will only assure that it won't be implemented.

So you are after something like R's *apply() family (or purrr's map*() family), with recycling of arrays in case of mismatch in their length?

Isn't MS Excel's MAP function close to that?

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/map-function-48006093-f97c-47c1-bfcc-749263bb1f01

Dear Jonathan Watt,

Please read this message in its entirety before proceeding.

Your bug report is being closed as INSUFFICIENTDATA due to inactivity and
a lack of information which is needed in order to accurately
reproduce and confirm the problem. We encourage you to retest
your bug against the latest release. If the issue is still
present in the latest stable release, we need the following
information (please ignore any that you've already provided):

a) Provide details of your system including your operating
   system and the latest version of LibreOffice that you have
   confirmed the bug to be present

b) Provide easy to reproduce steps – the simpler the better

c) Provide any test case(s) which will help us confirm the problem

d) Provide screenshots of the problem if you think it might help

e) Read all comments and provide any requested information

Once all of this is done, please set the bug back to UNCONFIRMED
and we will attempt to reproduce the issue. Please do not:

a) respond via email 

b) update the version field in the bug or any of the other details
   on the top section of our bug tracker

Warm Regards,
QA Team

MassPing-NeedInfo-FollowUp