Level 1

4 points

New Numbers Update adds @ Operators to my formulas. What is that and should I be concerned?

I have a complicated formula in a spreadsheet somebody else helped me build here and after the new update I got a couple of messages in places I don't understand. Everything is still working but I'm concerned it might break later if I don't address it. But also I'm wondering if the new updates might have a better way to do what I'm wanting to do? I don't know what "Spill" means or if it might be helpful? Normally the formulas in Row 1 are just backups so I can copy/paste them farther down in the column in the versions in the rows underneath the header get messed up. So it's ok that they have the little triangle usually. But the blue flags farther down and the change to my formula with the @ Operator inserted have me worried.

I'll share a link to a copy of the example document if anybody wants to check it out to see what I mean:

Example Document of the Problem

Posted on Apr 4, 2025 12:28 PM

Top-ranking reply

Camelot

Level 9

58,269 points

Posted on Apr 4, 2025 12:57 PM

Numbers has added support for array functions - where certain functions can accept either a range or a specific cell, and the @ sign is its way of forcing which way is used.

In the past your formula said...

=IF($A... )

which was interpreted as 'the cell in Column $A of this row'. However '$A' could also be interpreted as 'the entire column A', and there are many cases where this would be appropriate, with no clear idea as to which method you mean to use... for example, if your function said '=IF(SUM($A)), does it mean the sum of all values in column A? or the current row's column A?

So the addition of the @ sign makes it clear that you want the current value in column A, not the sum (or reference to all cells) of column A.

The notice tells you that Numbers has updated your formulas to the new format, and you should check to make sure they work as expected (e.g. you really want to reference the entire range, not just the current row's value).

As for the 'Spill', that indicates that without the @ sign, Numbers would return an array of values (in this case equal to the number of rows in the table), and would fill down the column to show those results. Again, there are cases where you want this, and cases where you don't. Now you have to be explicit.

Of course, this does mean that you could fill the entire table with one formula in B2 that doesn't use the @$A, so it retrieves all the corresponding values from column A with a single formula.

View in context

Similar questions

Replacing formulas issue Replacing formlara (eg in a Row) is only working on a single cell. Replacing the entire row will fail. the reference is shifting after the first cell to some other value, makes it impossible to work with larger sheets. it was working before. That, what it should look like (after pasting every single cell) $B337×E$332÷365×E$56 $B337×F$332÷365×F$56 …… This is what it looks like (after pasting all cells) $B337×E$332÷365×E$56 $B337×F$303÷365×F$142 $B337×G$303÷365×G$142
790 13

20 replies

May 14, 2025 6:11 AM in response to Camelot

“Numbers has added support for array functions…”

are these documented anywhere?

the Numbers support page (List of functions by category – Apple Support (UK)) does not mention array functions. You cannot search for “@“, array or spill in the support pages, and the whats new page talks at length about 3D images and ai nonsense (!!) but only links to a generic page for the functions … which do not mention any new functions explicitly!

My iPad pros all fail to finish calculating on previously working sheets … no errors no links … no explanation … just blue flags, @ added in random sports etc.

where is the documentation?!

tinmanjc

Level 1

8 points

May 17, 2025 12:29 PM in response to Superjuke

Camelot, I think I understand what you mean but just incase. Isn’t that why you put the $ in? To differentiate between the column and the cell? eg: No $ would only include the cell as where no $ would include the entire column. The reason for no $ traditionally is so a formula can travel down a column and the table assume your formula is advancing to the next row/column and therefore the reference has also moved. But what I think you might be saying is that instead of the reference moving to a new cell, that the entire column could be used as a range not just a moving reference. Is there a better way to define a formula without the @ or are we stuck with using for everything?

Apr 7, 2025 3:50 AM in response to Camelot

It looks like it is backwards compatible. If I edit a Numbers document on iPhone on 14.4 and then open it on Mac on 14.3, the @ sign is gone.

Apr 9, 2025 9:33 AM in response to papalapapp

papalapapp.

That's the right way to go. I saw that dialog earlier but didn't catch the little arrow link to the solution. Too flustered at the moment, I guess.

Thanks for posting that.

Jerry

tinmanjc

Level 1

8 points

May 18, 2025 8:52 AM in response to SGIII

Excellent answer. One even I could understand. Thank you.

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

New Numbers Update adds @ Operators to my formulas. What is that and should I be concerned?