The Weird and The Wonderful

kwkonrad6-Jul-11 4:15

kwkonrad

6-Jul-11 4:15

Maybe not; if K11 is the price you get, and L11 is the cost, then it will give you the revenue in percent

phil.o6-Jul-11 4:45

phil.o

6-Jul-11 4:45

A little maths :

(1 - (K11 - L11)/K11) * 100
= (1 - (K11 / K11) + (L11 / K11)) * 100
= (1 - 1 + (L11 / K11)) * 100
= (L11 / K11) * 100

Smile | :)

0bx6-Jul-11 8:51

0bx

6-Jul-11 8:51

Yeah... I think I'm going to bed early tonight. Sleepy | :zzz:

Giraffes are not real.

Klaus-Werner Konrad6-Jul-11 10:46

Klaus-Werner Konrad

6-Jul-11 10:46

No - it's (K11 - L11) !!!

And also you should check operator precedence !

You should take another base course in math Smile | :)

phil.o6-Jul-11 22:58

phil.o

6-Jul-11 22:58

Just prove what you say and I'll look for a maths course...

myramla14-Jul-11 21:24

myramla

14-Jul-11 21:24

>(1 - (K11 - L11)/K11) * 100
> = (1 - (K11 / K11) + (L11 / K11)) * 100
Where did the + came from ?

(K11 - L11)/K11 is the same as (K11 / K11 ) - (L11 / K11)

Besides, the parentheses signifies that it should be evaluated first.
the formula is evaluated to;
K11 - L11 then divided by K11, subtract the answer from 1 then multiplied by 100 to represent as a percentage.
This is a valid income formula.
if L11 = 100, K11 = 200, this will result into a 50% answer.

BobJanova14-Jul-11 22:25

BobJanova

14-Jul-11 22:25

Two minuses make a plus. So yes, as you got, (k-l)/k is k/k-l/k. But the expression is 1-(k-l)/k = 1-(k/k-l/k) = 1-k/k+l/k. The post you were replying to brings the fraction inside and resolves the brackets in one step. (As described earlier, it then further simplifies 1-1+l/k = l/k.)

phil.o15-Jul-11 2:13

phil.o

15-Jul-11 2:13

(1 - (K11 - L11)/K11) * 100
= (1 - ((K11/K11) - (L11/K11))) * 100
= (1 - (1 - (L11 / K11))) * 100
= (1 - 1 + (L11 / K11)) * 100
= (L11 / K11) * 100

Did you got it ?

Spotted on The Daily WPF...

StevenFoust19-Jul-11 5:28

StevenFoust

19-Jul-11 5:28

Whoever set up the spreadsheet originally simply plugged in standard accounting formulas without performing any simplification.

Gross Profit Margin is defined as the difference between revenue and cost of goods sold, divided by the revenue:

GPM = (Revenue - CoGS)/Revenue

The equation in the spreadsheet you were looking at was looking at (effectively):

(1 - GPM)*100

True, it could have been simplified, but there are (at times) reasons for not performing every possible simplification. In this case, to someone who "thinks" in terms of CoGS, Revenue, Margins, etc. the equation given makes a lot of sense. To a programmer (or a mathmatician) it is not very efficient, but to the accountant it provides self-documenting code. This is especially important in Excel, where you can't add comments to the code (cell equation).

It appears that they were trying to calculate the proportion of each dollar of revenue that the company spent as expenses.

Lutosław4-Jul-11 12:37

Re: Spotted on The Daily WPF...

4-Jul-11 12:37

Go to the google account creation whiz: https://www.google.com/accounts/NewAccount[^] and, in a captcha box, press a disabled button. This is an "echoed" hall of shame.

source :the daily[^]

Greetings - Jacek

GenJerDan5-Jul-11 8:01

GenJerDan

5-Jul-11 8:01

Great. Pushing that button has apparently affected my hearing. Well, they've always said the internet was a dangerous place.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

My Mu[sic]
My Films
My Windows Programs, etc.

Spotted on The Daily WTF...

AspDotNetDev5-Jul-11 8:13

Re: Spotted on The Daily WTF... [modified]

5-Jul-11 8:13

FTFY.

Driven to the ARMs by x86.

Lutosław5-Jul-11 10:32

5-Jul-11 10:32

AspDotNetDev wrote:
FTFY.

Did you mean:
1.fixed that for you.
2.f*ck this f*ck you
3.For the F*ck, YES!

~~Whatever it was,~~
(no pun intended)

Greetings - Jacek

modified on Tuesday, July 5, 2011 5:26 PM

AspDotNetDev5-Jul-11 10:53

5-Jul-11 10:53

Number 1. Do you realize yet the typo I was correcting? It's the daily "WTF", not the daily "WPF".

Driven to the ARMs by x86.

Lutosław5-Jul-11 11:26

5-Jul-11 11:26

Ah. I am not really into all these shorthands. Thanks. By the way, these two acronyms are equivalent for me (WPF and WTF).

Greetings - Jacek

AspDotNetDev5-Jul-11 11:39

5-Jul-11 11:39

Jacek Gajek wrote:
these two acronyms are equivalent for me

To me they are Windows Presentation Foundation and What The F***. So I guess they are the same to me too. Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

Driven to the ARMs by x86.

Lutosław5-Jul-11 11:47

5-Jul-11 11:47

AspDotNetDev wrote:
Windows Presentation Foundation and What The F***

This is what I meant... C'mon, WTF = Worse Than Failure, don't be oh, rude, oh.

Greetings - Jacek

AspDotNetDev5-Jul-11 11:49

5-Jul-11 11:49

Ah yes, like "Read The Free Manual". Wink | ;)

Driven to the ARMs by x86.

BobJanova5-Jul-11 23:43

BobJanova

5-Jul-11 23:43

Hehe, not heard that one before. RTFM has gone out of fashion though with the elimination of actual manuals to refer to.

#realJSOP7-Jul-11 2:16

#realJSOP

7-Jul-11 2:16

It's funny that you used the wrong term ("shorthands"), followed by the correct term ("acronym"). You are consistent in your inconsistencies.

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997

Lutosław7-Jul-11 7:51

7-Jul-11 7:51

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
you used the wrong term ("shorthands"),

How should it go then? shortcuts? shortlegs?

Greetings - Jacek

Re: Try again... [modified]

BobJanova7-Jul-11 22:45

BobJanova

7-Jul-11 22:45

Abbreviations.

Try again...

0bx1-Jul-11 3:54

0bx

1-Jul-11 3:54

I was about to delete this, but might as well post it here first.

I'm making pac-man.

The Enemy is the "ghost", Hero is "pacman".
When the value of the map[x,y] = 1 it means there's a wall.

Worst thing is that the ghost is still going through walls.

Lesson for today: don't be lazy and design a decent recursive algorithm Sniff | :^)

if (Math.Abs(Enemy.X - Hero.X) > Math.Abs(Enemy.Y - Hero.Y))
            {
                if ((Enemy.X - Hero.X) > 0)
                {
                    if ((map[Enemy.X - 1,Enemy.Y]) != 1)
                    {
                        Enemy.X -= 1;
                    }
                    else
                    {
                        if ((Enemy.Y - Hero.Y) > 0)
                        {
                            Enemy.Y -= 1;
                        }
                        else Enemy.Y += 1;
                    }
                }
                else
                {
                    if ((map[Enemy.X + 1,Enemy.Y] != 1))
                    {
                        Enemy.X += 1;
                    }
                    else
                    {
                        if ((Enemy.Y - Hero.Y) > 0)
                        {
                            Enemy.Y -= 1;
                        }
                        else Enemy.Y += 1;
                    }
                }

            }
            else
            {
                if ((Enemy.Y - Hero.Y) > 0)
                {
                    if ((Enemy.Y - 1) != 1)
                    {
                        Enemy.Y -= 1;
                    }
                    else
                    {
                        if ((Enemy.X - Hero.X) > 0)
                        {
                            Enemy.X -= 1;
                        }
                        else Enemy.X += 1;
                    }
                }
                else
                {
                    if ((Enemy.Y + 1 != 1))
                    {
                        Enemy.Y += 1;
                    }
                    else
                    {
                        if ((Enemy.X - Hero.X) > 0)
                        {
                            Enemy.X -= 1;
                        }
                        else Enemy.X += 1;
                    }
                }

Giraffes are not real.

Lutosław4-Jul-11 2:50