On Friday, November 29, 2019 at 7:01:27 AM UTC+7, nugget wrote: > What would be the clean way of balancing both accounts other than > hardcoding a transaction and changing it everytime some historic > transactions pops up? >
I would suggest not to use nested accounts like you have in your example. Don't put transactions in Assets:Parent. In the real world, banks and brokerages generally don't allow accounts to work like in your example. There's a beancount plugin called "leafonly" -- https://aumayr.github.io/beancount-docs-static/api_reference/beancount.plugins.html#module-beancount.plugins.leafonly -- which is how most accounts should be structured, with only rare exceptions. In any case, dealing with "historic transactions that pop up" is always going to cause problems with balance statements. The solution is to not have historic transactions popping up -- don't write balance statements when you have unknown(?!) outstanding transactions -- or accept that you will need to rewrite your beancount history & transactions. That pad does that automagically for you is not a good thing IMHO. I think that pad statements should be used very sparingly. They are convenient but a little too magical. You get 99% of the benefit, with no confusion, by simply writing the equivalent pad transaction yourself and making it explicit. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beancount" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/1cc1b693-e310-4e64-8953-28c9f169dcdf%40googlegroups.com.
