Hi Robert, I'm the guy who opened this bug report. The easiest thing to do is get a copy of Microsoft's Excel program & use their YEARFRAC function in an array of cells with various values, then compare them to openoffice's look- alike. The expected results are also implied in the bug report description: e.g., "one day apart"; meaning it is really easy to catch failing values -- just compute the year by your own calculation, an almanac, or any number of online tools that return things like "How many days from...". If you don't want to trust EXCEL then consider that even if EXCEL is occasionally wrong sometimes the question to consider is this. Is the goal for openoffice's version to be CORRECT or just CONSISTENT with EXCEL? That's a much trickier question than you might think. Years ago I worked at IBM on Instruction Set microcoding in System/370/390 machines & when we fixed many of the elementary math library functions (sine, cosine, square root, etc..) to be CORRECT then all kinds of things broke for users whose calculations manually corrected for inconsistencies in the old routines out there that used and depended on these (lots and lots!). Nastily they also broke for subtle things like the fact that now "new and different" results were returned because of the difference in roundings between the new (and correct) and the old (wrong, sometimes, extremely wrong) function calls and instructions. E.g. something as simple as x=sqrt(x*x) would produce an actual inequality if you round both sqrt(x) and Y*Y differently in one library versus the other. Lastly there was the fun of old but fixed routines having to coexist with old not-fixed yet routines! It was a nightmare. Lots of fun. The brilliant mathematicians at IBM Research who devised most of the algorithms -- some luminaries there as well! Jim Cooley and Bryant Tuckerman -- were both chagrined and humbled by the results of "interfacing with the world of users" -- not the ivory tower. :-) The reason I put in the weird-sounding hints re: leap years is that -- having worked on date and time functions for the Ingres database (years and years ago :-)) and fixed issues with certain dates and with certain times, esp. between different time zones & the Gregorian, Julian, Russian time jumps -- I know that leap years cause head-aches as special conditions: skip leap years across century changes except for millennium changes and so on ... So, the programming algorithms, shared functions, and special-condition handling of anyone's particular date & time implementation all have a lot to do with how accurately these work across the large (but practically bounded) input arguments spectrum. You can do an extremely thorough job of testing these, though, as you can, e.g., blast monotonically increasing dates and times at it & actually exhaust the valid data input & combinations spectrums. Dates way in the future can be excluded as well as before the big bang which bounds the spectrums. Computers sure are fast. Good luck, -- Jim On Dec 14, 2010, at 11:32 PM, Robert Roth wrote: > Can anyone specify what the expected results are for the examples > specified in the bug description? Thanks. > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/127505 > > Title: > [Upstream] [hardy] YEARFRAC function returns incorrect results > for some dates