On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 3:16 AM, John Wiegley <[email protected]> wrote:
> It is the sequence of transactions that matters, not their date ordering. Oh I didn't know that. It would have tripped me too had I used ledger in this manner. This becomes very difficult to analyze when transactions are spread across files and included together. I am sure there is a good reason why the sequence is given importance. For example, it might otherwise be ambiguous to prioritize transactions within a day. Especially when = operator is used. An alternative way to resolve the priority could be to error out and urge the user to define the sequence explicitly. For example, the user could specify the time of transactions within a day (for only those transactions that need ordering). Or instead of time, it could be some abstract number. With *abandon*, I want to avoid imperative behavior as far as possible. It would be great if other "ledgers" also could agree on this. cheers, -- *Harshad RJ <http://lavadip.com>* -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ledger" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
