On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 07:29:30PM -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> David Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ugh! That is a completely meaningless name. *Every* numeric field is
> > a "quantity". Of WHAT is it a quantity?
>
> Well, we had talked about using "quantity" and "value". Quantity
> would indicate how much of the thing you have, and value it's value.
> Though quantity, taken by itself, is ambiguous, I'm not sure it's so
> bad when within the context of a split. It would be hard to confuse
> it with any of the other fields, and it's arguably better than
> damount.
>
> In any case, better names, would certainly be welcome.
Value I think is okay, as long as it is the value of the entity which
the row represents. Otherwise I like something a little more specific,
even if it is redundant, like split_value. I'll give it some more
thought.
--
Dr. David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Collection Editor & Coordinator http://www.linuxdoc.org
Finger me for my public key
Ingrate, n.:
A man who bites the hand that feeds him, and then complains of
indigestion.
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnumatic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
