ps. Excel does some things OK, like drawing pretty graphs on smallish datasets and visualize quick analysis with pivot tables. It just lacks a sensible scripting language and is generally very brittle once the data is getting nontrivial and more than one person is involved.
One big problem it solves for regular people (i.e. not programmers) is this: "our workflow and/or reality of our business changes much faster than the IT department/outside contractors can keep up with".
(The other big, and related, problem is: "our IT department/outside contractors have no clue and don't really even care much about what we actually do or need".)
round (2.575, 2)
in Python leads to 2.57 instead of rounding up to 2.58. Everything in our engineering firm is checked by another engineer. In [7]: round(2.575, 2)
Out[7]: 2.58
Umm?The behavior of round() for floats can be surprising: for example, round(2.675, 2) gives 2.67 instead of the expected 2.68. This is not a bug: it’s a result of the fact that most decimal fractions can’t be represented exactly as a float.
In [17]: Decimal(2.675)
Out[17]: Decimal('2.67499999999999982236431605997495353221893310546875')
So sort of round() is working as expected, but the number you are not inputting is not the one you are expecting.Yes, but the main one is that institutional IT policies frequently dictate that people whose aren't employed specifically in software development roles aren't allowed software development tools, but everyone in the org tends to be allowed core Office apps like Excel.
When it's literally the only remotely applicable tool most people are allowed to have, it shouldn't be surprising that it gets used for a lot, independent of merit.
And I'm not sure the things that make Excel so crappy could really be fixed without sacrificing the things that make it such a flexible and useful tool. For instance, adding the ability to recurse or iterate sanely would remove the transparency of having every iteration of a computation clearly visualized cell-by-copy-pasted-cell.