That is where the initial comment came from. I made the erroneous assumption that a formula of that length would take up a lot of memory and not work very well. I was wrong - like I am on many things and if you follow the thread on Ozgrid I happily admitted to my mistake. At any rate I think it is wise to change your mind as you are shown a better way or are proven to be wrong. It won't be the last time but I will keep trying to learn from my mistakes.I remember this formula very well as I made the mistake of not testing it before I commented on it.
Yeah I would like to see it tested in 03 (from memory you can have over 255 characters but anything over 255 won't be visible in the cell, is that right? I no longer have the program as when you install later versions of XL earlier versions of XL get swiped. Be nice if someone could test it and get back on the forum.I don't think that formula would work in XL 2003, just by being too long.
Yes it does seem like there is an error in the formula. Good opportunity while Begcar is developing it to provide some fixes@ Smallman & Luke Sir, sorry for Interrupting, but the formula mentioned on Ozgrid is not giving me correct result.