2nd part of date

[Genx]

Right, ive got a small problem, i need to be able to format a date in a certain field like this Saturday 22[color:blue]nd October. Is there anyway to get that second part (the nd) to automatically change according to what the date is... i.e. 21[color:blue]st or 23[color:blue]rd.

Cheers for help, genx

[aaa]

Hy aflgenx!

Look attachment. You must to continue calculation formula for all choices.

Date.zip

[Genx]

... Seems a bit tedious but i really need it, so thanks...

[LaRetta]

For the life of me, I can't understand why you are creating those extra fields, aaa. Day and DayName are already functions.

Hi aflgenx,

This calculation (result of text) will do it all. Just copy/paste it into your calc box then change date to your real field name:

Case(

not IsEmpty( date ); DayName( date ) & " " & Day (date) &

Case(

PatternCount( " 1 21 31 "; " " & Day( date ) & " " ); "st";

PatternCount( " 2 22 "; " " & Day( date ) & " "); "nd";

PatternCount( " 3 23 "; " " & Day( date ) & " " ); "rd";

"th" ) & " " & MonthName( date )

)

The principle behind this pretty thing was gleaned from -Queue-

LaRetta

Edited September 20, 2005 by Guest
Calc correction

[Raybaudi]

cleared because duble

Edited September 20, 2005 by Guest
duble

[Raybaudi]

Hi LaRetta

it is fine... but with a little typo:

Case(not IsEmpty(date); DayName(date) & " " & Day (date)&

Case(

PatternCount( " 1 21 31 "; " " & Day(date) & " " ); "st";

PatternCount( " 2 22 "; " " & Day(date) & " "); "nd";

PatternCount( " 3 23 "; " " & Day(date) & " " ); "rd";

"th" ) & " " & MonthName(date))

[aaa]

For the life of me, I can't understand why you are creating those extra fields, aaa.

Hi, Laretta! I created this fields only for easy understanding. You are right, this fields is not necessary.

[LaRetta]

Thanks for the catch, Daniele! I will edit my calc also. That's what happens when I wake up at 2:30 AM and think I can work. :tongue2:

[LaRetta]

I created this fields only for easy understanding. You are right, this fields is not necessary.

Hmmm, my concern is that others (particularly those new) may not realize those fields are unnecessary and will duplicate your example exactly to reproduce your suggestion. So instead of adding to their understanding, it adds to convolution instead because they will perpetuate 'fluff' fields unnecessarily.

And each of these unnecessary calculations (used to then combine with the final calculation) will slow a system down substantially. The other issue that is important here is to be sure and type the darned calculations right the first time (my example above).

LaRetta

[Raybaudi]

I like who can smile by himself !

[Genx]

much simpler, cheers guys