On 6/30/14 9:55 PM, John Wiegley wrote:
Martin Blais <[email protected]> writes:
Sure, but then a transaction that does nothing would appear in the register,
no?
I feel sympathetic to Martin here - a separate directive seems more
orthogonal. Postings are already expressing quite a lot.
Though, if not taking journal order into account I would have processed
it last, after any transactions on that day.
If taking order into account, which I wouldn't mind doing - h/ledger do
it elsewhere - the separate directive would be just as expressive as the
current scheme, no ? More so, as it would never introduce dummy
transactions and requiring -E to hide (possibly disturbing your report
in other ways).
If the posting-based assertions do remain, then hledger will probably go
ahead and add == to assert against the full multi-commodity amount.
--
---
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.
