Easy Question

[Bob]

Excel 2003

I think this is easy but I don't know how to do it. I have a column of
figures that we keep adding to and it gets longer and longer. I just need a
formula that will return the last figure in the column at any given time.

Thanks in advance... Bob

 

[Pete_UK]

Assuming your figures (numbers ?) are in column A, try this in B1:

=LOOKUP(1E100,A:A)

Hope this helps.

Pete

 

[Gord Dibben]

To return the last numeric in a column.

=LOOKUP(9.99999999999999E+307,F:F)

To return last filled cell(text or numeric) in a column

=LOOKUP(2,1/(A1:A65535<>""),A1:A65535)


Gord Dibben MS Excel MVP

 

[Bob]

Thank you.

Bob

Assuming your figures (numbers ?) are in column A, try this in B1:

=LOOKUP(1E100,A:A)

Hope this helps.

Pete

 

[Pete_UK]

You're welcome, Bob - 1E100 is a bit easier to type than
9.99999999999999E+307 (Excel's largest number), and is usually large
enough in most situations.

Pete

 

[Rick Rothstein \(MVP - VB\)]

You're welcome, Bob - 1E100 is a bit easier to type than

9.99999999999999E+307 (Excel's largest number), and is usually large
enough in most situations.

By that reasoning (easier to type, usually large enough), wouldn't it be
just as easy to type 1E300 and get nearer to the max? For that matter,
wouldn't 1E307 be just as easy also?

Rick

 

[T. Valko]

By that reasoning (easier to type, usually large enough), wouldn't it be
just as easy to type 1E300 and get nearer to the max? For that matter,
wouldn't 1E307 be just as easy also?

Rick **********
=LOOKUP(10^10,B1:E1)

And it'd be even more efficient (recalc and storage) if you replaced the
unnecessary expression with a numeric constant.

=LOOKUP(1E10,B1:E1)
**********
See Pete, no matter what you do someone is not satisfied! <VBG> (I've been
guilty of this myself but I'm trying to just let it go)

So, not only do we have to make it past Harlan, now we have to make it past
Rick! <VVVBG>

Pete, hold your ground, don't cave! I have to admit that I caved.

 

[Rick Rothstein \(MVP - VB\)]

And it'd be even more efficient (recalc and storage) if you replaced the
unnecessary expression with a numeric constant.

=LOOKUP(1E10,B1:E1)
**********
See Pete, no matter what you do someone is not satisfied! <VBG> (I've been
guilty of this myself but I'm trying to just let it go)

So, not only do we have to make it past Harlan, now we have to make it
past Rick! <VVVBG>

LOL... 3 V's, that's like an ear-to-ear grin.

Hey, all I did was to ask a simple question (if you were going to type 100,
why not 300 at a minimum?).

Rick

 

[T. Valko]

LOL... 3 V's, that's like an ear-to-ear grin.

Hey, all I did was to ask a simple question (if you were going to type
100, why not 300 at a minimum?).

Rick

I'd be willing to bet that in 9.99E101% of cases 1E100 is more than
sufficient. At some point needless robustness is just overkill. That's one
of the reasons I "resist" using 9.99999999999999E+307.

It confuses a lot of (if not most) people. How many 9s do I have to type?

If I'm looking up Joe's last bowling score why do I need a lookup_value of
9.99999999999999E+307?

I'm certain that I didn't make a mistake and accidentally enter any of his
scores as 1545879520012459897542524.

LOL... 3 V's, that's like an ear-to-ear grin.

I was hoping you would get a kick out of that!

Cheers!

 

[Gord Dibben]

Looks like some of my golf rounds.


Gord

I'm certain that I didn't make a mistake and accidentally enter any of his
scores as 1545879520012459897542524.


I was hoping you would get a kick out of that!

Cheers!