Simon Michael <[email protected]> writes: > I have to say, this explanation makes no sense to me. In general I > expect *ledger to use the dates I've provided to model the order of > events. So far this has worked pretty well for me. I think it's an > important property; without it I'd feel like the tool is fighting me > rather than assisting.
Which dates? The ledger format allows for multiple dates (primary, auxiliary, maybe others). In one ordering, a balance assertion (I don't use assignments) may be accurate; in another ordering, say by auxiliary date, the balance assertion may well be wrong. Balance assertions by parse order work reasonably well when the transaction order is the bank's and the assertion is the bank statement's balance, or when the transaction order is from stubs/receipts and the assertion is from some other kind of summation. But since ledger permits essentially arbitrary reordering, the balance assertions can't work in all orders: one has to be chosen. Given this, parse order doesn't seem to be too unreasonable. Cheers, Christophe -- --- 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.
