New posts

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MacInWin" data-source="post: 1767501">The problem is that what's in D3 depends on D9, and what's in D9 depends on D8, D8 depends on D7, D7 depends on D6, D6 depends on D5, D5 depends on D4, D4 depends on D3, but D3 depends on D9, so it goes circular. In testing in Excel, I think the loop is broken by the existence of one TRUE statement, which no longer refers to the previous cell, but if that TRUE statement is missing, the same error appears in Excel. Try it yourself. Blank out A1 in excel and you get an immediate error message saying it's circular. I guess maybe Numbers tests BEFORE the true/false assessment and sees the circularity that way, while Excel tests the truth of the statement before assessing circularity. Frankly, Excel's approach is less correct than Numbers, but your spreadsheet takes advantage of that weakness in Excel.I have thought about it some, but cannot think of a simple way to avoid the circularity. Everything I try keeps coming back to the circular argument. The only way out I can see is to build a table with days across the top and days down the side. In each cell is the amount of money that would be needed to be added to today's balance to forecast to the date in the week the next time it happens. If the average deposits for each day are subject to change, build that table with references to the averages, don't hard code the values. Then a combination of vlookup or hlookup should let you fetch the amount from the table based on the current day of the week and the date being forecasted. As I said, not simple.Good luck with it. I'm not a Numbers wizard, maybe someone more experienced in it than I can figure out how to get around the circular reference. Too bad Numbers didn't have the loophole (bug?) Excel does.</blockquote>

Verification: Name this item 🌈