>>>>> Martin Blais <[email protected]> writes: > If the community accounts straddle the real accounts, you just filter by the > CommunityX bit. Imagine for a moment the worse case, that all real accounts > have all community subaccounts (in practice this rarely occurs, BTW, > real-world structure is always more constrained than this deliberately > chosen "full-product of dimensions" example):
> Assets:Real:Account1:Community1 > Assets:Real:Account1:Community2 > Assets:Real:Account1:Community3 > Assets:Real:Account1:Community4 > Assets:Real:Account1:Community5 > Assets:Real:Account2:Community1 > Assets:Real:Account2:Community2 > Assets:Real:Account2:Community3 > Assets:Real:Account2:Community4 > Assets:Real:Account2:Community5 > Assets:Real:Account3:Community1 > Assets:Real:Account3:Community2 > Assets:Real:Account3:Community3 > Assets:Real:Account3:Community4 > Assets:Real:Account3:Community5 They do fully straddle, and this solution above is just too ugly. Ledger often opts for convenience over theoretic purity, and this is one of those cases where I find it fully justified. When I mentioned my motivation for virtual accounts, I said that part of it was to make an onerous task less onerous so that I would actually keep up with it. The huge amount of account splitting you've suggested above would make the system laborious enough that I would give up on it. Hence, virtual accounts. John -- --- 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/d/optout.
