Re: Small cleanup in fn-financial.c

[Neil Booth <neil daikokuya demon co uk>]

Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:-

> I believe we should wait with `cleaning up' the code until these 
> functions work flawlessly.

Cleaning up is good to do anytime, except for a freeze before a
release.  Duplicated code is a maintainence issue.  You combined the
implementation, why not combine the wrapper?  I don't see any point in
not applying the patch.

> Especially if we decide not to emulate all Excel bugs should we ask
> ourselves whether COUPPCD should return #NUM!  when matirity ==
> settlement.

Yup, like I said.  But that's just changing one line in the (merged)
code.  It can be argued that settlement is never maturity, I guess, so
I might have been wrong about that (having settlement == maturity is
useful internally, but probably not externally).

I don't think there's much point trying to fluff the functions up too
much; despite their attempts to appear otherwise they are really
U.S.-specific, and a proper bond analytics implementation would not
have an exposed interface anything like what Excel has.

> Moreover, the name gnumeric_coupcd is misleading since all the
> gnumeric_ procedures should correspond to implemented functions.

OK.  I don't have any good ideas for another name.  coup_cd_wrapper
maybe?

Neil.