[dan-robertson]

I think I disagree entirely.

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

[kccqzy]

> 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.

You should look into array formulas (or block formulas). They break out of the one-at-a-time mold and could be much more powerful.

[aaronblohowiak]

Filtering is very much done in sheets I have seen and used

[dan-robertson]

Yes but it’s not done with a function like filter in scheme or Haskell, it’s done by the gui, outside of the world of formulas. For more complex stuff there are database features hidden away inside

[Q6T46nT668w6i3m]

Excel doesn’t support mapping over columns or rows?