On Wednesday, June 9, 2021 at 4:51:48 PM UTC+7 [email protected] wrote: > It's *extremely* common *in the US*, where I'm going to surmise Brandon is > from. A commercial US accounting package that didn't know about checks > would be laughed out of the room. >
Good thing beancount isn't a commercial US accounting package :-) There's no such thing as checks where I live, so I'd be a bit put out if beancount made them a fundamental part of the schema just because America has an archaic banking system ;-) > My most minor gripe, though, it is pretty jarring being in the US, is >> > the requirement to use ISO8601 dates. As you can see from the GnuCash >> > record, the US typically uses MM/DD/YYYY dates, and it's almost unheard >> > of to use the ISO8601 style. I believe the lexer could trivially be >> > modified to accept both types as I do not believe there is any >> ambiguity >> > between the ISO8601 and the US method, as the four-digit year is either >> > the start or end of the string. Would adding support for the US-style >> > dates be a reasonable feature request? >> > > I'm shocked, *shocked*, to see a software developer asking for MM/DD/YYYY > over ISO8601 :) :) > Why should US dates get preferential treatment here? Why not Australian dates? DD/MM/YYYY is also unambiguous with ISO8601. -- 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/83a71c32-6951-411b-997a-d26e97423679n%40googlegroups.com.
