This "transfer with cost" problem is becoming a FAQ for crypto users.
We're going to have to implement something automatic eventually.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 3:33 AM Ghanashyam Prabhu <gpio....@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thanks Ben, I was able to go through this documentation and made some
> updates to the file.
> I wasn't documenting the Buy Posts correctly. I now have it such that it
> adds a cost basis with the date at buy time. With this I was able to even
> write the transfer as well and bean-check runs clean!
> Reference here for folks who visit this thread. (posted a couple of
> transactions)
>
> Thanks
> Ghanashyam
>
> 2020-11-28 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.20778508 BTC {18078.87 USD,
> 2020-11-28}
> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:Cash -3756.52 USD
>
> 2020-12-17 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.02109060 BTC {23707.24 USD,
> 2020-12-17}
> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>
> 2021-01-04 * "Tranfer BTC from Coinbase to CoinbasePro"
> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.20778508 BTC {18078.87 USD,
> 2020-11-28}
> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.20778508 BTC {18078.87 USD,
> 2020-11-28}
> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.02109060 BTC {23707.24 USD,
> 2020-12-17}
> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.02109060 BTC {23707.24 USD,
> 2020-12-17}
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 at 22:22, Ben Blount <b...@bben.us> wrote:
>
>> Beancount Precision & Tolerances
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lgHxUUEY-UVEgoF6cupz2f_7v7vEF7fiJyiSlYYlhOo/edit>
>>
>> Beancount can be smart about finding the original lot when reducing. If
>> you do it by price it must be exact. If you do it by date, it must be
>> exact. Either way it must be unambiguous in the end. For multiple lots in a
>> single day you'd need to provide both cost and date. Tolerances and
>> precision are not in any way involved when matching lots.
>>
>> Please look carefully at your transaction, it makes no sense. Remember
>> Beancount has no idea that you are moving the same lot to CoinbasePro so
>> trying to put a posting like this will not work:
>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.20778508 BTC {2020-11-28}.
>> This has no cost attached to it.
>>
>> Please review the docs provided in earlier replies, I think they will
>> help you if you take the time to grok them fully.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:12 PM Ghanashyam Prabhu <gpio....@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I did note the precision from the error message
>>> Are you suggesting using something like
>>> option "inferred_tolerance_default" "USD:0.001"
>>>
>>> I have it already - with and without this makes no difference
>>>
>>> The alternative method of using only dates, is it something like this
>>> below? This too shows an error with bean-check but the error message isn't
>>> that informative though
>>>
>>>> Failed to categorize posting 7
>>>
>>>
>>> 2021-01-04 * "Transfer BTC from Coinbase to CoinbasePro"
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.20778508 BTC {2020-11-28}
>>> ;;;; 18078.87 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.20778508 BTC {2020-11-28}
>>> ;;;; 18078.87 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.02109060 BTC {2020-12-17}
>>> ;;;; 23707.24 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01977443 BTC {2020-12-26}
>>> ;;;; 25285.18 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01741186 BTC {2020-12-30}
>>> ;;;; 28716.06 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01667888 BTC {2021-01-01}
>>> ;;;; 29978.03 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01464422 BTC {2021-01-03}
>>> ;;;; 34143.16 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.02109060 BTC {2020-12-17}
>>> ;;;; 23707.24 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01977443 BTC {2020-12-26}
>>> ;;;; 25285.18 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01741186 BTC {2020-12-30}
>>> ;;;; 28716.06 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01667888 BTC {2021-01-01}
>>> ;;;; 29978.03 USD,
>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01464422 BTC {2021-01-03}
>>> ;;;; 34143.16 USD,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 at 21:56, Ben Blount <b...@bben.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One more thing to add, if you want to match the lot with 2 digits of
>>>> precision, try to specify it that way when you first create the lot.
>>>> Unfortunately sometimes that means you can't use expressions that end up
>>>> generating lots of digits or else you'll end up with a reduction like
>>>> -0.20778508 BTC {18078.68014392563700916350683 USD}.
>>>>
>>>> Alternatively, Beancount does let you match using the date, assuming
>>>> that is unambiguous.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:52 PM Ben Blount <b...@bben.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Please carefully review the error message. It has been telling you
>>>>> precisely what is wrong each time, though it does require some
>>>>> understanding which I think you now have.
>>>>> This time the lot is not matching exactly.
>>>>> -0.20778508 BTC, cost=CostSpec(number_per=Decimal('18078.87' ... USD
>>>>>
>>>>> You can see the balance it's trying to match against in the same error:
>>>>> 0.20778508 BTC {18078.68014392563700916350683 USD, 2020-11-28},
>>>>>
>>>>> An exact match is required. I have a pull request open
>>>>> <https://github.com/beancount/beancount/pull/589> that would've made
>>>>> this work as you expected it to. Note, I don't know if Martin agrees with
>>>>> me that lot matching should accept small variations, so that pull request
>>>>> might not be merged.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:44 PM Ghanashyam Prabhu <gpio....@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ben, Thanks for pointing out that we'd need {} at a minimum.
>>>>>> Note that adding this to both the postings shows an error when I run
>>>>>> bean-check
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Error message is here
>>>>>> Failed to categorize posting 2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2021-01-04 * "CoinbasePro" "Tranfer BTC from Coinbase to
>>>>>> CoinbasePro" #transfer
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.29738506 BTC {}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.29738506 BTC {}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In order to fix this. instead of using #transfer and the transfer
>>>>>> plugin I used the below transaction with individual cost basis added to
>>>>>> each transaction
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2021-01-04 * "Tranfer BTC from Coinbase to CoinbasePro"
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.20778508 BTC {18078.87
>>>>>> USD, 2020-11-28}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.02109060 BTC {23707.24
>>>>>> USD, 2020-12-17}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01977443 BTC {25285.18
>>>>>> USD, 2020-12-26}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01741186 BTC {28716.06
>>>>>> USD, 2020-12-30}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01667888 BTC {29978.03
>>>>>> USD, 2021-01-01}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01464422 BTC {34143.16
>>>>>> USD, 2021-01-03}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.20778508 BTC {18078.87
>>>>>> USD, 2020-11-28}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.02109060 BTC {23707.24
>>>>>> USD, 2020-12-17}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01977443 BTC {25285.18
>>>>>> USD, 2020-12-26}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01741186 BTC {28716.06
>>>>>> USD, 2020-12-30}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01667888 BTC {29978.03
>>>>>> USD, 2021-01-01}
>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01464422 BTC {34143.16
>>>>>> USD, 2021-01-03}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Using this too shows another error when I run bean-check
>>>>>> Error message indicates
>>>>>> No position matches "Posting(account='Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC',
>>>>>> units=-0.20778508 BTC, cost=CostSpec(number_per=Decimal('18078.87'),
>>>>>> number_total=None, currency='USD', date=datetime.date(2020, 11, 28),
>>>>>> label=None, merge=False), price=None, flag=None, meta={'filename':
>>>>>> '<filename>', 'lineno': 112})" against balance (0.20778508 BTC
>>>>>> {18078.68014392563700916350683 USD, 2020-11-28}, 0.02109060 BTC
>>>>>> {23707.24398547220088570263530 USD, 2020-12-17}, 0.01977443 BTC
>>>>>> {25285.17889011212965430609125 USD, 2020-12-26}, 0.01741186 BTC
>>>>>> {28716.05905400112337223019252 USD, 2020-12-30}, 0.01667888 BTC
>>>>>> {29978.03209807852805464155867 USD, 2021-01-01}, 0.01464422 BTC
>>>>>> {34143.16365091483192686261201 USD, 2021-01-03})
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 at 21:14, Ben Blount <b...@bben.us> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Beancount has two ways to track any kind of currency/commodity: at
>>>>>>> cost, or not at cost.
>>>>>>> Generally, currency like USD, EUR, etc are not tracked at cost.
>>>>>>> Stock, securities etc are tracked at cost so you can report capital
>>>>>>> gains.
>>>>>>> Beancounts infers what mode you are working in by the presence of a
>>>>>>> CostSpec { } when working with that lot (both for reducing and
>>>>>>> augmenting
>>>>>>> lots).
>>>>>>> It's actually possible for the same account to hold a commodity both
>>>>>>> at cost, and not at cost. This is *strongly *not recommended, and
>>>>>>> beancount.plugins.coherent_cost can be used to verify you don't do it.
>>>>>>> That plugin would show you what is wrong here. It's:
>>>>>>> 2021-01-04 * "Transfer BTC from Coinbase to CoinbasePro" #transfer
>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.29738506 BTC
>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.29738506 BTC
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are trying to work with the BTC in the non-cost-tracking mode.
>>>>>>> You should at minimum add {}
>>>>>>> 2021-01-04 * "Transfer BTC from Coinbase to CoinbasePro" #transfer
>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.29738506 BTC {}
>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.29738506 BTC {}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But really what you likely actually want is to recreate all the
>>>>>>> original lots, just in a new account. That's the original subject of
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:00 PM Ghanashyam Prabhu <
>>>>>>> gpio....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Martin, Apologies if this was confusing. Can you elaborate on
>>>>>>>> what is wrong?
>>>>>>>> I have added comments to my transactions for your reference - Note
>>>>>>>> the points till which bean-check shows no errors.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let me comment the individual transactions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ;; This transaction purchases BTC at Coinbase from Cash existing in
>>>>>>>> Coinbase account
>>>>>>>> ;; The $3500 already existed and is correct from from the previous
>>>>>>>> transactions.
>>>>>>>> ;; Also this transaction requires additional $256.48 which is used
>>>>>>>> from my Checking account
>>>>>>>> ;; There are previous transactions
>>>>>>>> ;; which I have not listed here.. For our discussion, consider that
>>>>>>>> the transaction starts here with
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2020-11-28 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.20778508 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>> 18078.87 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:Cash -3500.00 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -256.48 USD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ;; All the below transactions are purchases by using cash from the
>>>>>>>> checking account
>>>>>>>> 2020-12-17 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.02109060 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>> 23707.24 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2020-12-26 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01977443 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>> 25285.18 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2020-12-30 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01741186 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>> 28716.06 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2021-01-01 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01667888 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>> 29978.03 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2021-01-03 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01464422 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>> 34143.16 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ;; I've added a balance assertion here to sum up the BTC
>>>>>>>> accumulated
>>>>>>>> ;; because of the above purchases
>>>>>>>> ;; A bean-check until this transaction inclusive of the balance
>>>>>>>> assertion
>>>>>>>> ;; does NOT show any errors.
>>>>>>>> 2021-01-04 balance Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.29738506 BTC
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ;; The next transaction I want is a transfer transaction from
>>>>>>>> Coinbase to CoinbasePro
>>>>>>>> ;; I initially added the below
>>>>>>>> 2021-01-04 * "Transfer BTC from Coinbase to CoinbasePro" #transfer
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.29738506 BTC
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.29738506 BTC
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ;; I now added a balance assertion again to check if the transfer
>>>>>>>> is complete
>>>>>>>> ;; and if the balance in CoinbasePro is correct
>>>>>>>> 2021-01-05 balance Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.29738506 BTC
>>>>>>>> ;; to check transfer complete from Coinbase to CoinbasePro
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ;; bean-check runs without any error until this point
>>>>>>>> ;; which means the transfer check is correct even at CoinbasePro
>>>>>>>> account
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now, at this point I want to add a sell transaction
>>>>>>>> 2021-01-08 * "" "Coinbase dummy sell"
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC -0.20295107 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>> 34860.28 USD
>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:Cash 7074.93 USD
>>>>>>>> Expenses:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:Fees 35.37 USD
>>>>>>>> Income:Capital-gains
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When I added the above sell transaction and run bean-check I get
>>>>>>>> the following error
>>>>>>>> No position matches
>>>>>>>> "Posting(account='Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC', units=-0.20295107
>>>>>>>> BTC,
>>>>>>>> cost=CostSpec(number_per=<class 'beancount.core.number.MISSING'>,
>>>>>>>> number_total=None, currency='USD', date=None, label=None, merge=False),
>>>>>>>> price=34860.28 USD, flag=None, meta={file} against balance (0.29738506
>>>>>>>> BTC)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ghanashyam
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 at 18:57, Martin Blais <bl...@furius.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This looks all wrong, see other thread.
>>>>>>>>> To buy BTC at Coinbase, the money all comes from your
>>>>>>>>> Coinbase:Cash account.
>>>>>>>>> Transfers from your bank are separate transactions.
>>>>>>>>> Reflect what's actually going on in the account
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 8:35 PM Ghanashyam Prabhu <
>>>>>>>>> gpio....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I had a similar use case here and ended up using the plugin to
>>>>>>>>>> report the transactions and then copied them manually into the
>>>>>>>>>> transfer
>>>>>>>>>> posting
>>>>>>>>>> This is my entries list. However I see that when I run bean-check
>>>>>>>>>> (v2), it errors out with an error
>>>>>>>>>> No position matches
>>>>>>>>>> "Posting(account='Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC', units=-0.20778508
>>>>>>>>>> BTC,
>>>>>>>>>> cost=CostSpec(number_per=Decimal('18078.87'), number_total=None,
>>>>>>>>>> currency='USD', date=datetime.date(2020, 11, 28), label=None,
>>>>>>>>>> merge=False),
>>>>>>>>>> price=None, flag=None, meta={
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you know why it complains on No Matching position when the
>>>>>>>>>> Cost basis are exactly the same?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2020-11-28 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.20778508 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>>>> 18078.87 USD
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:Cash -3500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -256.48 USD
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2020-12-17 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.02109060 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>>>> 23707.24 USD
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2020-12-26 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01977443 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>>>> 25285.18 USD
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2020-12-30 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01741186 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>>>> 28716.06 USD
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2021-01-01 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01667888 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>>>> 29978.03 USD
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2021-01-03 * "Coinbase" "Buy BTC at Coinbase"
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.01464422 BTC {} @
>>>>>>>>>> 34143.16 USD
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:BofA:Checking -500.00 USD
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2021-01-04 balance Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC 0.29738506 BTC
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2021-01-04 * "Transfer BTC from Coinbase to CoinbasePro"
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.20778508 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {18078.87 USD, 2020-11-28}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.02109060 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {23707.24 USD, 2020-12-17}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01977443 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {25285.18 USD, 2020-12-26}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01741186 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {28716.06 USD, 2020-12-30}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01667888 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {29978.03 USD, 2021-01-01}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:Coinbase:BTC -0.01464422 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {34143.16 USD, 2021-01-03}
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.20778508 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {18078.87 USD, 2020-11-28}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.02109060 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {23707.24 USD, 2020-12-17}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01977443 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {25285.18 USD, 2020-12-26}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01741186 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {28716.06 USD, 2020-12-30}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01667888 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {29978.03 USD, 2021-01-01}
>>>>>>>>>> Assets:US:Crypto:CoinbasePro:BTC 0.01464422 BTC
>>>>>>>>>> {34143.16 USD, 2021-01-03}
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, 2 January 2021 at 03:10:52 UTC-8 David Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the detailed answers!!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> > BTW, David: as you can see, transfers work fine when fully
>>>>>>>>>>> specified, so this is a matter of convenience. I personally have a
>>>>>>>>>>> vim
>>>>>>>>>>> plugin that uses bean-doctor context to insert the lots.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It seems to me that it's more than a matter of convenience. If
>>>>>>>>>>> the reductions / augmentations are explicitly specified, the
>>>>>>>>>>> booking will
>>>>>>>>>>> be potentially incorrect (i.e. no longer respect FIFO) if
>>>>>>>>>>> transactions that
>>>>>>>>>>> change the state of the inventory are subsequently added to the
>>>>>>>>>>> ledger with
>>>>>>>>>>> a date before that of the transfer.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> > Curious: is there anything specific to crypto that makes these
>>>>>>>>>>> transfers common?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Transferring funds between institutions / accounts is very
>>>>>>>>>>> common when working with crypto. For example, it is not generally
>>>>>>>>>>> considered prudent to leave crypto custodied at a centralised
>>>>>>>>>>> exchange, so
>>>>>>>>>>> many users will transfer their assets into their own custody
>>>>>>>>>>> directly after
>>>>>>>>>>> having made a trade. As another example, users of DeFi applications
>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>> often move their assets between many different institutions (smart
>>>>>>>>>>> contracts) as the yields offered to depositors change.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> > If this is the defining/key feature that enables working with
>>>>>>>>>>> crypto currencies, we could consider supporting this explicitly in
>>>>>>>>>>> the core
>>>>>>>>>>> booking algos (in v3, not touching v2 much anymore)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As mentioned above, these workflows are very common. I would
>>>>>>>>>>> certainly be very happy if these workflows were supported in the
>>>>>>>>>>> core
>>>>>>>>>>> booking algorithms.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> > Also: I'd love to gather a set of features that are key to
>>>>>>>>>>> making Beancount more usable for cryptocurrency trading.
>>>>>>>>>>> > Here's a doc where you can insert ideas:
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1taN9lbcNDf8bKgDwprWOhuaOsOgALZzmsfvec-rdaSk/edit#
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Very happy to hear that you're interested in working to make
>>>>>>>>>>> beancount more friendly for crypto users. I'll keep playing around
>>>>>>>>>>> and see
>>>>>>>>>>> if I can find some other pain points :)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, December 30, 2020 at 8:22:33 PM UTC+1
>>>>>>>>>>> bl...@furius.ca wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 1:39 AM redst...@gmail.com <
>>>>>>>>>>>> redst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 10:02:15 PM UTC-8
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bl...@furius.ca wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 12:55 AM redst...@gmail.com <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> redst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That makes sense. I was thinking of a system where
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plugin/booking/interpolation iterate over the same entries
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until no more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> modifications occur. This would involve some thought to prove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commutativity (order doesn't matter), and (b) convergence (no
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infinite
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> iterations).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Iterate over the same entry until no more modification
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> occurs" seems error prone to me, and a potential nightmare for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> debugging.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agreed. Although I've seen it work very well in systems where
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the key was to identify the constraints to make it work
>>>>>>>>>>>>> predictably.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reg. the other approach -- i.e., supporting this in core
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> booking algos: even outside crypto, isn't the philosophy you've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> put forth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "works on unambiguous source"? Given that, is there a syntax
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that removes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ambiguity? For example:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *2020-01-01 * "Transfer"*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Asset:BrokerageA -10 HOOLI {}*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Asset:BrokerageB: 10 HOOLI {}*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be unambiguous for FIFO, LIFO, and STRICT, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arguably for NONE (and AVG in the future). I.e., identical
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CostSpec after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inverting the sign of one. I haven't thought deeply about all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cases, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyway, not the most important thing for v3.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "works on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unambiguous source",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What I mean is: even if a CostSpec if incompletely specified,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as long as it is unambiguous beancount will process it correctly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For
>>>>>>>>>>>>> example: there's no need to specify date in a cost specification
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as long as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price is adequate to uniquely identify the lot. Along those
>>>>>>>>>>>>> lines, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was making the argument that the transaction above is unambiguous
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in saying
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transfer all lots from BrokerageA to BrokerageB," and thus, it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nice for the core booking algos to handle it correctly rather
>>>>>>>>>>>>> than depend
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on a plugin.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>>>>>>> The challenge is to design those things to be general. I think
>>>>>>>>>>>> in this case the addition could be as simple as honoring a special
>>>>>>>>>>>> flag on
>>>>>>>>>>>> an interpolation posting, telling the interpolation code not to
>>>>>>>>>>>> convert to
>>>>>>>>>>>> cost.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/bd63fee9-2635-4a7f-9d2f-c6be0ab723edn%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/bd63fee9-2635-4a7f-9d2f-c6be0ab723edn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhOOPwB%3DbQe5GHdtiaZpEUYpYSZsp_Z1D124r0k47eSXZA%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhOOPwB%3DbQe5GHdtiaZpEUYpYSZsp_Z1D124r0k47eSXZA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCET5KOR5H2LqXBELTWnz4UiD0FEb%3DOYJ8uR6BqOM%2BGT%2BCA%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCET5KOR5H2LqXBELTWnz4UiD0FEb%3DOYJ8uR6BqOM%2BGT%2BCA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CACGEkZsLWdkMLC0LTHy6HuFkfDzGzv2MHwJP0AX6Aje%2B-7Te0w%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CACGEkZsLWdkMLC0LTHy6HuFkfDzGzv2MHwJP0AX6Aje%2B-7Te0w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCES1xujaP%2BqZbMFHBXAMnknOpYcOJkGgdcBf3VGFPW8vDg%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCES1xujaP%2BqZbMFHBXAMnknOpYcOJkGgdcBf3VGFPW8vDg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CACGEkZszOgBvRfmfzv5ymuNXyxqXJ-9BmFdKH4yWL9MmTmx2Dg%40mail.gmail.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CACGEkZszOgBvRfmfzv5ymuNXyxqXJ-9BmFdKH4yWL9MmTmx2Dg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> --
>>> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCEQ7YOVhkoG7jDB%2BS8D51MR3fKieDv-6Eu19RVSPQSRRuA%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCEQ7YOVhkoG7jDB%2BS8D51MR3fKieDv-6Eu19RVSPQSRRuA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>> Google Groups "Beancount" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/beancount/vDX1oA2mJXA/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CACGEkZuPp55sqs5Ei5jRtUXRNx5he2nts_CE-ZjhXq82yRs%2BPw%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CACGEkZuPp55sqs5Ei5jRtUXRNx5he2nts_CE-ZjhXq82yRs%2BPw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
> --
> 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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCERk8rcwab2m56u3wdNvyycp_zFuoSLHZpPVO8TkyVObCA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CABieCERk8rcwab2m56u3wdNvyycp_zFuoSLHZpPVO8TkyVObCA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
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 beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhPzkYTgMzM7k_2Ax1ncT-sKAP1N6XN3AC46jayvOFn2kA%40mail.gmail.com.
