|
|
|
|
|
|
by infogulch
2822 days ago
|
|
|
If Excel had just a couple more features it could be much more ergonomic and not even need macros. Specifically: anonymous functions/lambdas made with just pure formulas. Define a function in a cell like `=($s) => [expr]` (or something idc). Call it with `=A1("string arg", B2:B100)` or by name if you name it via named ranges. Functions are obviously a new data type, so you can pass them as parameters to each other or to relevant builtins. It would turn Excel into some kind of hybrid pure functional/spatial language where the code itself is spatial data. |
|
|
The typical things one gains from higher order functions are things like mapping and filtering of data structures. Excel only has one data structure—the table. Mapping is done by writing the formula once and then dragging it from the corner to the whole column. Filtering is not really done. Normally use the gui to hide the rows to be filtered away.
Functions add in questions of scoping. How are closures supposed to work? Could there be some way to say “the function in cell A1 at the time and closing over the state of when cell B2 was last logically computed”? Excel handles scoping in the non-function-in-cell approach using $.
Obviously this all breaks apart when you don’t want tables where you drag things either always down or always across