https://github.com/beancount/beancount/issues/614
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 9:14 AM Martin Blais <bl...@furius.ca> wrote:
> 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%2BhO0ocxtw-jMcAzvaXV8di95BSSWOBp6rQO4XHvyi-%3Daqg%40mail.gmail.com.
