On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 04:00 Daniele Nicolodi <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 06/09/23 01:27, Sagar Shankar wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > > > Thanks a lot, this works now! A simple line on this in the pad > > documentation would be great for future reference of others > > The behavior is due to the balance directive being treated specially > when sorting, not to the pad directive. Ordering is relevant for how all > directives are processed. You would have observed similar issues if you > had a transaction and a balance assertion on the same day. The order in > which directives are processed is documented. I don't think adding a > note to the documentation of each directive remembering the ordering > issue would make the documentation better. Booking decisions and validity are also order dependent. Given how much the current documentation emphasizes that the order of entries doesn’t matter, this is IMHO confusing for new users. I do believe the documentation would be improved by describing (somewhere) those cases where intra-day ordering *does* matter, and referencing that caveat in the places where ordering-invariance is claimed. > > Cheers, > Dan > > -- > 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/8204877c-9fcf-e0b9-f2b3-c11cad2a7cd3%40grinta.net > . > -- 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/CAFXPr0v6ZM286Z-G8xKc208V8jjorexE4LJ_GrZ1kW%2BtkHPL1Q%40mail.gmail.com.
