Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
insert a future date
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date.
I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is
to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks! I write macros frequently but had not used those functions.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"not reliable for serious use"
Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is,
your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are well-documented. Cheers j "macropod" wrote in message ... "not reliable for serious use" Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel.
Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation. Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done... "Jezebel" wrote in message ... Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are well-documented. Cheers j "macropod" wrote in message ... "not reliable for serious use" Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-)
-- Greg Maxey/Word MVP A Peer in Peer to Peer Support macropod wrote: Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel. Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation. Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done... "Jezebel" wrote in message ... Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are well-documented. Cheers j "macropod" wrote in message ... "not reliable for serious use" Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Greg,
Just getting a bit fed up with this Jezebel character spouting off about the supposed unreliability of something he/she obviously doesn't understand. My work in this area has been good enough for O'Reilly Media Inc to publish in their recent "Word Hacks" (see Chapter 8, Forms and Fields) - I wonder what Jezebel's had published. Cheers "Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards) wrote in message ... Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-) -- Greg Maxey/Word MVP A Peer in Peer to Peer Support macropod wrote: Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel. Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation. Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done... "Jezebel" wrote in message ... Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are well-documented. Cheers j "macropod" wrote in message ... "not reliable for serious use" Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I have decided to take this one offline. Reply sent to your e-mail address
provided here. If it is bogus, and you want to receive you have mine. Congratulations on the published work. Do you have a link? -- Greg Maxey/Word MVP A Peer in Peer to Peer Support macropod wrote: Hi Greg, Just getting a bit fed up with this Jezebel character spouting off about the supposed unreliability of something he/she obviously doesn't understand. My work in this area has been good enough for O'Reilly Media Inc to publish in their recent "Word Hacks" (see Chapter 8, Forms and Fields) - I wonder what Jezebel's had published. Cheers "Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards) wrote in message ... Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-) -- Greg Maxey/Word MVP A Peer in Peer to Peer Support macropod wrote: Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel. Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation. Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done... "Jezebel" wrote in message ... Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are well-documented. Cheers j "macropod" wrote in message ... "not reliable for serious use" Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Your offensiveness and asinine debating tricks don't trouble me in the
least. It's a pity you don't put your ingenuity to some useful purpose. Your 'field hacks' are very clever, but to suggest that they are a useful way to set up Word documents on which people can rely is disingenuous to say the least. Your 'implementation' doesn't demonstrate anything except the fact that you obviously haven't tested it very thoroughly. (If you had, one would expect a little humility from you ... ) "macropod" wrote in message ... Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel. Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation. Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done... "Jezebel" wrote in message ... Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are well-documented. Cheers j "macropod" wrote in message ... "not reliable for serious use" Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Greg,
Requested link: http://safari.oreilly.com/0596004931 Cheers "Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards) wrote in message ... I have decided to take this one offline. Reply sent to your e-mail address provided here. If it is bogus, and you want to receive you have mine. Congratulations on the published work. Do you have a link? -- Greg Maxey/Word MVP A Peer in Peer to Peer Support macropod wrote: Hi Greg, Just getting a bit fed up with this Jezebel character spouting off about the supposed unreliability of something he/she obviously doesn't understand. My work in this area has been good enough for O'Reilly Media Inc to publish in their recent "Word Hacks" (see Chapter 8, Forms and Fields) - I wonder what Jezebel's had published. Cheers "Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards) wrote in message ... Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-) -- Greg Maxey/Word MVP A Peer in Peer to Peer Support macropod wrote: Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel. Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation. Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done... "Jezebel" wrote in message ... Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are well-documented. Cheers j "macropod" wrote in message ... "not reliable for serious use" Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet earth. Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out: http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html and find out how this stuff *really* works. "Jezebel" wrote in message ... This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use. "Tim Wallin" wrote in message ... Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date. I've tried: 1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches. 2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it. Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this? Thanx, Tim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
insert a future date | Microsoft Word Help | |||
Insert Excel Worksheets into Word Document | Microsoft Word Help | |||
The Insert Key | Microsoft Word Help | |||
How do I creat a diary date in Outlook from a date in a Word | Microsoft Word Help | |||
How do I insert multiple addresses into labels? | Microsoft Word Help |