On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli <[email protected]> wrote:
> [ sorry for catching up with such an old thread only now ] > > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 08:08:37AM -0700, Simon Michael wrote: > > On 5/17/14 11:50 PM, Martin Blais wrote: > > >I wonder if a more general rule-of-thumb can be inferred here: "if you > > >can make do with subaccounts, you should always favor that over tags or > > >other mechanisms." Not sure if always true? But surely something to > > >think about. > > > > That has always been my default stance. > > > > I'm only half way through this thread, but it contains a wealth of > > information. We need a curator of useful mail list knowledge. > > I'm always struggling between tags and (sub-)accounts, and I'd love to > be able to apply such a general rule. > > The main problem with (sub-)accounts, though, is that if you want to use > --strict (which is a good general sanity rule), you have to declare all > of them. And that quickly becomes painful. > I don't feel that pain at all. One creates new accounts only rarely, adding new declarations is a very minor annoyance, and it provides the system with useful information to help it tell you when you make mistakes. Closing accounts also provides useful information for reporting purposes, i.e., an account closed before the reporting period should not have to appear in a report. FWIW, Beancount is always strict (there is no strict vs. non-strict option and I like it like 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.
