Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

7
  • Thank you, @Jim K. I confirmed that works for the case of Node 4, getting 3 items ordered ascending, but if I replace the value of 4 with 3, I only get 1 result (3), when I am looking for 3 results again (should always be 3 for this geometric configuration), namely a match on "C" from columns D17:E22, which should give me 2,3 and 6. Is there a way to specify that? Commented Oct 31, 2023 at 20:53
  • Is it possible to have the arrays limit themselves to the size of the results, not the size of the "source" lookup "array"? Commented Oct 31, 2023 at 21:43
  • Is there a way to use OR to combine the results of two separate formulas in the same formula, each focusing on one of the columns "D" or "E" ? If I use a separate formula for 2 separate "arrays" (columns), is there a way to OR those two "arrays" into a single new array which has no empty cells? Commented Oct 31, 2023 at 21:45
  • @EricMarceau: See edited answer to handle that example.
    – Jim K
    Commented Oct 31, 2023 at 21:50
  • Thank you again, @Jim K. Is there any way to "output" nothing, i.e. not "add" empty string as a case response in an array position, thereby leaving only "real" responses in the array, which would then be limited to the size of actual data? Commented Nov 1, 2023 at 2:23