There are only two ways to tell somebody thanks: Kudos and Marked Solutions Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines "Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God" - 2 Corinthians 3:5
Wow. Now you're asking. Hmm. It was a shadowy memory of some past confusion with In Range and Coerce when using DBLs vs INTs. Thinking harder now I believe it was youthful ingorance that the Coerce ignores the diamonds, which define whether the limits are inclusive or exclusive. The diamonds only influence the In Range? output.
For example, in the following snapshot, it's clear why the In Range is true when the upper limit is inclusive and false when exclusive, but as a LV noob (many years ago now) I think I'd expected the coerced value for the upper to be 5, not 6. Afterall, when the upper limit is excluded it can't allow 6, so it should be coerced down to 5, right? Reading the help it's clear that the coerce is not influenced by the diamonds, but as a newcomer to LabVIEW I'd not expected this behaviour.
It's precisely because using DBLs (floats) makes this area very murky that the function ignores the include/exclude setting. Afterall, if these were floats and you excluded the upper limit of 6, what would you coerce the numeric to? 5.9? 5.99? 5.9999999? It can't be satisfied, so better to just use the range limits inclusively.
Nice explanantion thanks. I see where you are coming from. I must admit it had never occurred to me to think about it like that. Ignorance really is bliss.
It will make a really good 'The Daily CLAD' question though.....