Fix SUMIF/COUNTIF exact text matching to not match substrings

[jpoz]

PR Details

Fix formulaCriteriaParser to anchor regex patterns so that exact text criteria in SUMIF/COUNTIF do not incorrectly match substrings.

Description

Modified formulaCriteriaParser to wrap regex patterns with ^ and $ anchors. Previously, criteria like "administrative" would match substrings such as "cyclical_flat_administrative", producing incorrect results. With this fix, exact text criteria only match full cell values, while wildcard patterns (*, ?) continue to work as expected.

Related Issue

N/A

Motivation and Context

When using SUMIF(A2:A7,"administrative",B2:B7), the formula was matching cells containing "cyclical_flat_administrative" and "pre_administrative_post" in addition to "administrative". This is incorrect behavior — Excel only matches exact values when no wildcards are present. The fix ensures parity with Excel's behavior.

How Has This Been Tested

Added TestCalcSUMIFExactMatch which verifies:

• Exact text match ("administrative") only matches full cell values (sum = 250, count = 2)
• Wildcard *administrative* matches all cells containing the substring (sum = 750, count = 4)
• Wildcard administrative* matches cells starting with the term
• Wildcard *administrative matches cells ending with the term
• Single char wildcard othe? matches as expected
• All existing tests continue to pass

Types of changes

• Docs change / refactoring / dependency upgrade
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.56%. Comparing base (418be6d) to head (0314ef3).
⚠️ Report is 24 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #2267    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   99.55%   99.56%            
========================================
  Files          32       32            
  Lines       25778    26316   +538     
========================================
+ Hits        25663    26201   +538     
  Misses         60       60            
  Partials       55       55            

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	99.56% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Fixes SUMIF/COUNTIF criteria parsing so that plain-text criteria match whole cell values (not substrings), aligning behavior with Excel’s exact-match semantics when no wildcards are present.

Changes:

• Updated formulaCriteriaParser to treat non-wildcard criteria as strict equality and wildcard criteria as anchored regex (^...$).
• Added a regression test covering exact-match vs wildcard-match behavior for SUMIF and COUNTIF.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
calc.go	Adjusts criteria parsing logic to prevent substring matches for non-wildcard text criteria and anchors wildcard patterns.
calc_test.go	Adds coverage ensuring exact matches don’t match substrings and wildcard patterns behave as intended.

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

calc.go:1868

• In the wildcard branch, the criteria is converted into a Go regexp by only replacing ?/* and then wrapping with ^...$. Any other regexp metacharacters in the original criteria (e.g. ., +, [, \, ^, $) are currently interpreted as regexp syntax (or can even make the pattern invalid), which diverges from Excel semantics where only * and ? are special. Consider escaping the input first (e.g. regexp.QuoteMeta(val) or reusing matchPatternToRegExp-style escaping), then translating the escaped wildcards (and ideally supporting Excel's ~ escape for literal */?).

	hasWildcard := strings.Contains(val, "?") || strings.Contains(val, "*")
	if strings.Contains(val, "?") {
		val = strings.ReplaceAll(val, "?", ".")
	}
	if strings.Contains(val, "*") {
		val = strings.ReplaceAll(val, "*", ".*")
	}
	if hasWildcard {
		fc.Type, fc.Condition = criteriaRegexp, newStringFormulaArg("^"+val+"$")
	} else {

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[xuri]

Thanks for your PR. I made some changes based on your branch, add more test cases and simplify code.