this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
1154 points (97.8% liked)

Microblog Memes

7845 readers
4112 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I disagree. There are louts of things that would not change old behavior but add so much convenience. Like cell reference for diagram ranges. But nope, we are stuck in 199...4?

[–] Madrigal@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I love some of the newer things like LET and LAMBDA. But I'd kill for structured references to be properly implemented everywhere. I'm a bit over using INDIRECT to get around it (when I can).

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yes. I have build dynamic diagrams with indirect, I feel ashamed.

Let us use Python instead of cancerous VBA. You can not even add comments to your variable definitions. Or named vars in functions. Why do I even need macros at all to simply define a function?

[–] Madrigal@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

You don’t, any more. At least not for relatively simple functions.

LAMBDA combined with the name manager lets you do custom functions even in a regular .xlsx workbook.

You don’t get the full control flow and extended functionality you do in VBA, and Python would be amazing of course, but I find LAMBDA covers about 90% of use cases.