> On Jan 30, 2026, at 09:26, John Ralls <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Jan 30, 2026, at 08:22, Stefan Koch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I don't know if this is the expected behavior for the higher level >> code. It seems a little funky that sometimes the date/time is not >> stored in the list, or that the keys could be different, but that is >> likely OK. >> >> I also don't know how this would affect real usage. There is no >> mentions (that a quick google search could find) of peer splits in the >> documentation. I did chance this up that the merge is only used in >> xaccScrubMergeLotSubSplits. But that is called in more places I am >> not familiar with. If you find a bug for this I can make a pull >> request with this. >> >> You mentioned capgains testing. If you point me in the right >> direction, I can take a look, but I don't know where to start at this >> point. > > Stefan, > > I don’t know either, which is why I want better testing of the usage. I > called it “capgains” because that’s what drives the lot scrubber. The > existing test is libgnucash/engine/test/test-lots.c and as you can see it’s a > very simple test that doesn’t really exercise the peer-split code at all.
Stefan, One more point: The lot scrubber is used and there aren’t a lot of complaints so we have to start from the assumption that the code does work in spite of the apparent flaws you’ve found. Regards, John Ralls
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
