On 7/1/14 6:23 PM, Martin Blais wrote:
A dedicated balance directive is also quite intuitive IMO.
Yes, I agree.
Order invariance, and having balance assertions on postings or as
separate directives, are mostly orthogonal issues I think.
No... that's exactly the problem I'm pointing out! They're not
orthogonal.
Ok, not completely orthogonal, there is overlap. Having assertions on
postings does partly determine the order they must be applied. This
depends also on how order-independent transactions (and postings within
transactions) are.
This gets a bit complicated. Eg, currently Ledger respects journal order
more, and transaction dates less, than hledger does when deciding the
order in which to to apply postings and assertions (I don't have an
example to hand). And on the other hand, hledger is more respectful of
journal order than Ledger is when processing postings and assertions
within a single transaction.
Do you mean the ordering issue ? The comment you're quoting there
doesn't change anything there, hledger would still process
transactions, postings and assertions in (1) date and (2) journal order.
So HLedger is or is not subject to the same problem that I point out in
my example?
You mean the problem that it's possible to break your assertions by
reordering things (postings, transactions, and/or assertions) in the
journal ? Yes hledger is subject to that.
--
---
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.
