Confusing reference to Excel in section 3.10.6

[AleBeda]

I find the reference to Excel in section 3.10.6 rather confusing, because accessing Excel workbooks was not introduced before in the text. I think that this example detracts from the explanation of the materialise function. Perhaps at least a cross reference to documentation of this specific function could be added, or a sentence tying Object Oriented Programming to Excel could be added before the example.

[rodrigogiraoserrao]

Thanks for opening this issue!

Regarding the confusion that arises from this, notice that the side note is in the “Specialist's Section”, so I think it is fairly acceptable that we mention Excel here without mentioning it before.

As for the sentence tying OOP with Excel, I'm assuming you mean something more than what is already written in the paragraph above the box you highlighted? Do you mean something that introduces, say, XL to be an object to represent Excel, then ActiveWorkbook to represent a notebook we have open, etc?

[AleBeda]

Rodrigo, you are right that it's an advanced section, but the matter is not of difficulty. It's a matter of sequence. Even in an advanced section, I think there should before the reader a way to logically reconstruct the meaning, without making assumptions. If anything is out of sequence, it should be cross-referenced.

I think you understood exactly what I felt was missing, i.e. that the text is considering Excel as one example of OO etc. etc.