When pasting a badly misformed formula into a spreadsheet, I'd rather be told at least that there's an error and perhaps even what error Calc sees. Instead, I think Calc attempts to fix the formula without telling us. In one case, it replaced commas with tildes. This means we have to re-proofread what we've pasted when pasting should allow us to skip that step if we already proofed it before pasting. (The specific case with the example is discussed at <http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/48439/calc-formula-why-are-tildes-auto-replacing-commas/>.) (I guessed my hardware.)
I can confirm with Version: 4.5.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: 51e0d789c344547956764c3b5f0ef5a304f4e0aa TinderBox: Linux-rpm_deb-x86_64@46-TDF, Branch:master, Time: 2015-04-13_16:58:45 paste into cell: =CONCATENATE(IF(BA3=1);"A";(IF(BA3=2);"B";(IF(BA3=3);"C";(IF(BA3=4);"D";(IF(BA3=5);"E";(IF(BA3=6);"F";(IF(BA3=7);"G";(IF(BA3=8);"H";(IF(BA3=9);"I";(IF(BA3=10);"J";(IF(BA3=11);"K";(IF(BA3=12);"L";(IF(BA3=13);"M";(IF(BA3=14);"N";(IF(BA3=15);"O";(IF(BA3=16);"P";(IF(BA3=17);"Q";(IF(BA3=18);"R";(IF(BA3=19);"S";(IF(BA3=20);"T";(IF(BA3=21);"U";(IF(BA3=22);"V";(IF(BA3=23);"W";(IF(BA3=24);"X";"Y")))))))))))))))))))))));RANDBETWEEN(5;17)) LO change into: =CONCATENATE(IF(BA3=1);"A";(IF(BA3=2)~"B"~(IF(BA3=3)~"C"~(IF(BA3=4)~"D"~(IF(BA3=5)~"E"~(IF(BA3=6)~"F"~(IF(BA3=7)~"G"~(IF(BA3=8)~"H"~(IF(BA3=9)~"I"~(IF(BA3=10)~"J"~(IF(BA3=11)~"K"~(IF(BA3=12)~"L"~(IF(BA3=13)~"M"~(IF(BA3=14)~"N"~(IF(BA3=15)~"O"~(IF(BA3=16)~"P"~(IF(BA3=17)~"Q"~(IF(BA3=18)~"R"~(IF(BA3=19)~"S"~(IF(BA3=20)~"T"~(IF(BA3=21)~"U"~(IF(BA3=22)~"V"~(IF(BA3=23)~"W"~(IF(BA3=24)~"X"~"Y")))))))))))))))))))))));RANDBETWEEN(5;17))
reproduced with LibreOffice 3.5.0 Build ID: d6cde02
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present on a currently supported version of LibreOffice (5.1.5 or 5.2.1 https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to "inherited from OOo"; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add "regression" to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug-20160920
Still repro. Version: 6.2.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: c4c56de1b0e62ec866b519b2b24c5e805f0a86d3 CPU threads: 4; OS: Linux 4.4; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3;
I disagree with the new summary, because it omits that the program is editing without telling the user that it's editing the paste. I don't know if the problem is limited to list/union cases. Can the new and old summaries be merged somehow?
The new summary exactly describes the cause of this behaviour, and yes, this is limited to the union case as the intention was to accept (range1;range2) as input for a range list (union) as in Excel.
Eike Rathke committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=a6032ff5418ad66cc8fec10c636e32b124ee7864 Resolves: tdf#90698 catch list (1;2) of non-references as error It will be available in 6.2.0. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Xisco Fauli committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/e7b0e0b2b0df7197ee04c5c7232145d7a044bae0 tdf#90698: sc_ucalc: Add unittest It will be available in 7.1.0. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.