Counting blank cells

Hi RagDyer!

As far as I can tell, I don't think it would be a problem in most cases.
But personally, I prefer to use 9.99999999999999E+307.

Since it's the largest number Excel recognizes, its use eliminates any
risk whatsoever regardless of how small or remote.

Cheers!

In article <eW2MmCioGHA.196@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>,
"Ragdyer" <RagDyer@cutoutmsn.com> wrote:

> Hey Domenic,
>
> What's your take on 99^99 ?
>
> Any opinions or foreseeable problems?
> --
> Regards,
>
> RD

But the 99^99 performs exactly the same function (no larger XL number), and
is easier to type.<bg>

Been using it for a while in some formulas at my plant, and am hoping that I
don't get bitten with any unforeseen future problems.
--

Regards,

RD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------
Please keep all correspondence within the Group, so all may benefit !
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------

"Domenic" <domenic22@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:domenic22-B27261.07145608072006@msnews.microsoft.com...
Hi RagDyer!

As far as I can tell, I don't think it would be a problem in most cases.
But personally, I prefer to use 9.99999999999999E+307.

Since it's the largest number Excel recognizes, its use eliminates any
risk whatsoever regardless of how small or remote.

Cheers!

In article <eW2MmCioGHA.196@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>,
"Ragdyer" <RagDyer@cutoutmsn.com> wrote:

> Hey Domenic,
>
> What's your take on 99^99 ?
>
> Any opinions or foreseeable problems?
> --
> Regards,
>
> RD

In article <uC6GleqoGHA.4192@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>,
"RagDyeR" <ragdyer@cutoutmsn.com> wrote:

> But the 99^99 performs exactly the same function (no larger XL number), and
> is easier to type.<bg>

Sure! In practice, it's not likely that data will contain a number
larger than 99^99. However, since it's theoretically possible... <bg>

Cheers!

thanks for all the help, got it working nicely now

this forum is awesome

peace out