Moving a row from one sheet to another wrongly leaves blank-row artifact.

[baobob@my-deja.com]

Moving an entire row within a sheet in Excel XP is implemented
correctly:

Select the entire row, cut it, go to the target location, and Insert
Copied Cells. The target row is inserted (pushing all rows below it
down), and the source row is deleted (bringing all rows below it up, as
it were).

NOT so when the target is in another sheet in the same workbook.

Excel inserts the target row correctly, but fails to delete the source
row. The row still exists (only it's blanked out). You have to remeber
to, tediously, return to the source and delete the blank row. Which
means that if you intended to continue working in the target sheet, you
end up having to navigate there TWICE.

Microsoft requires you to do the work Excel should do, because Excel
DOES do it, in the former context.

Copy means COPY, and move means MOVE. And move DOESN'T mean
keep-but-merely-blank-out the source.

A Microsoft design rationale for implementing different behavior in
these contexts aside--and I'm sure there is one--is there an option to
make Excel delete the source row after all row moves?

Thanks.

***

[Dave Peterson]

I get the same behavior in xl2003 whether the pasted sheet is in a new workbook
or the same workbook--the original copied row is cleared, but not deleted.

It may not be what you want, but it is consistent.

baobob@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> Moving an entire row within a sheet in Excel XP is implemented
> correctly:
>
> Select the entire row, cut it, go to the target location, and Insert
> Copied Cells. The target row is inserted (pushing all rows below it
> down), and the source row is deleted (bringing all rows below it up, as
> it were).
>
> NOT so when the target is in another sheet in the same workbook.
>
> Excel inserts the target row correctly, but fails to delete the source
> row. The row still exists (only it's blanked out). You have to remeber
> to, tediously, return to the source and delete the blank row. Which
> means that if you intended to continue working in the target sheet, you
> end up having to navigate there TWICE.
>
> Microsoft requires you to do the work Excel should do, because Excel
> DOES do it, in the former context.
>
> Copy means COPY, and move means MOVE. And move DOESN'T mean
> keep-but-merely-blank-out the source.
>
> A Microsoft design rationale for implementing different behavior in
> these contexts aside--and I'm sure there is one--is there an option to
> make Excel delete the source row after all row moves?
>
> Thanks.
>
> ***

--

Dave Peterson

[RagDyeR]

You could try this:

Select row and "Copy" *OR* "Cut".

Then, while row is *still* selected,
"Delete" it.

Navigate to new sheet,
Insert new 'blank' row,
<Ctrl> <C> <C>
to bring up ClipBoard
And click on item to paste into row.

Few extra keystrokes,
But ... your decision if it's worthwhile not to have to return to original
sheet.
--

HTH,

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

<baobob@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1152767009.083022.210450@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Moving an entire row within a sheet in Excel XP is implemented
correctly:

Select the entire row, cut it, go to the target location, and Insert
Copied Cells. The target row is inserted (pushing all rows below it
down), and the source row is deleted (bringing all rows below it up, as
it were).

NOT so when the target is in another sheet in the same workbook.

Excel inserts the target row correctly, but fails to delete the source
row. The row still exists (only it's blanked out). You have to remeber
to, tediously, return to the source and delete the blank row. Which
means that if you intended to continue working in the target sheet, you
end up having to navigate there TWICE.

Microsoft requires you to do the work Excel should do, because Excel
DOES do it, in the former context.

Copy means COPY, and move means MOVE. And move DOESN'T mean
keep-but-merely-blank-out the source.

A Microsoft design rationale for implementing different behavior in
these contexts aside--and I'm sure there is one--is there an option to
make Excel delete the source row after all row moves?

Thanks.

***

[baobob@my-deja.com]

Belated thanks to both who replied.

And that's a great workaround, to spend a couple extra keystrokes and
delete before leaving your source location, then insert & paste at the
target from the Clipboard.

That maintains your mental order of cut-->paste intact.

I shoulda thought of that. Duh.

***

[Ragdyer]

It always bothers me though ... to delete.

If something goes wrong, you can't easily recuperate.

You'll have to close *without* saving, and then, of course, you *also* lose
all your work since your last save.

It would pay to Save *before* you start this type of procedure.

Anyway, appreciate your feed-back.
--
Regards,

RD

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please keep all correspondence within the NewsGroup, so all may benefit !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<baobob@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1153161607.359963.311690@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Belated thanks to both who replied.
>
> And that's a great workaround, to spend a couple extra keystrokes and
> delete before leaving your source location, then insert & paste at the
> target from the Clipboard.
>
> That maintains your mental order of cut-->paste intact.
>
> I shoulda thought of that. Duh.
>
> ***
>