Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The "formal" term (as much as it's formal) for this is that you have
> > some accounts that are "roll-up" accounts, which exist to combine the
> > data in their children.
>
> Glad one of us knows this sort of thing :>
Yea, thanks for the accounting vocabulary (I _KNEW_ I should have
paid more attention in accounting 101 -- too bad I never took it ;)
> > Based on these examples, the appropriate thing is for the control
> > to be on an account-by-account basis.
>
> That sounds appropriate.
Agreed.
There _is_ a field in struct _account called "flags". Luckily, as far
as I can tell, this field is never actually used. Unfortunately it is
only a 'char' instead of an 'unsigned long' (or UINT32). However, I
can't see anywhere in the code where this field is used, really.
There is xaccGetAccountFlags(), but there is no xaccSetAccountFlags().
AFAICT, the flags field is ALWAYS zero.
Could we, perhaps, usurp this field? Honestly, we only need 1 bit in
the field for this flag. What was the original purpose of this field?
Is is supposed to be a bit-field?
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL N1NWH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available
--
Gnucash Developer's List
To unsubscribe send empty email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
