4 ms·

Wow this is cool! I felt that something like this could be transformative to excel for some time. 2014: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8116224 https://ne

Wow this is cool! I felt that something like this could be transformative to excel for some time. 2014: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8116224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8116224 > spreadsheets might be an interesting programming environment if you were restricted to the native functionality with a small addition. Namely, add a new value type: "anonymous function,"... 2019: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21356824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21356824 > Excel needs exactly one thing to blow open the doors on productive programming: a new "function" data type. Since it's just a data type, you put it in a cell just like any other data type. Have some way to call it, like `A1(arg1, arg2)` or something. Now you can leverage the full capabilities of Excel to manage it, name it (named ranges), etc just like other data. ... From the same thread: > VBA is just an escape-hatch to a 'real' programming environment; my claim is that excel sheets & formulas alone could be a 'real' programming environment in its own right, no escape hatches necessary. I wonder if my comments inspired someone. :3

Grustaf 6y ago
Totally agree, we even applied to YC 5 years ago with an excel replacement specifically because of this limitation.
- infogulch 6y ago
  The danger here is that MS can just observe your success and add the feature once you've proved it works, and your nice little blue gulf instantly turns red again. Though I might be interested in a redesign of the formula language; excel's is kinda crusty.
  - Grustaf 6y ago
    The idea had many downsides. But considering how little excel has changed in the 20 years I’ve used it, I wouldn’t be too worried about that particular issue!
    - infogulch 6y ago
      Yet here we are. Microsoft is surprising everybody lately.
- daxfohl 6y ago
  Actually what might be better is "sheet functions". So like pages where you can define input and output cells. Then you top level sheet can invoke the "function" as like "=myfunctionsheet{A1=5, A2=9}.N8". That way you get local scope, etc, and you can do more complex stuff because it's very visual instead of being a mathematical function.
  - daxfohl 6y ago
    Obviously this will be best when used with Name Manager (especially if names can be scoped to the sheet) to name the input and output cells, rather than indexing off the cell ids directly.

Grustaf 6y ago

Totally agree, we even applied to YC 5 years ago with an excel replacement specifically because of this limitation.

infogulch 6y ago
The danger here is that MS can just observe your success and add the feature once you've proved it works, and your nice little blue gulf instantly turns red again. Though I might be interested in a redesign of the formula language; excel's is kinda crusty.
- Grustaf 6y ago
  The idea had many downsides. But considering how little excel has changed in the 20 years I’ve used it, I wouldn’t be too worried about that particular issue!
  - infogulch 6y ago
    Yet here we are. Microsoft is surprising everybody lately.
daxfohl 6y ago
Actually what might be better is "sheet functions". So like pages where you can define input and output cells. Then you top level sheet can invoke the "function" as like "=myfunctionsheet{A1=5, A2=9}.N8". That way you get local scope, etc, and you can do more complex stuff because it's very visual instead of being a mathematical function.
- daxfohl 6y ago
  Obviously this will be best when used with Name Manager (especially if names can be scoped to the sheet) to name the input and output cells, rather than indexing off the cell ids directly.