On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Nathan Grigg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 7:16 AM, Martin Blais <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This is perhaps a second question, but I'm confused as to the meaning of > Ledger's filter expressions. > > > > When you say: > > ledger reg assets:receivable and @CBI > > > > Does it mean: > > Select all the POSTINGS with account Assets:Receivable > > AND > > select all the TRANSACTIONS with payee "CBI"? > > As I understand it, you are always matching postings, but the payee is > propagated to each posting. I think of it as "postings with given account > and payee," but you may be more comfortable if you say "postings with a > given account and in a transaction with given payee." (Although this might > also be less correct because you can override the payee per posting in a > transaction.) > That seems like an odd choice. If it was constrained to only select subsets of transactions, then you'd have a claim to balance the reports. Any subset of transactions will balance (because each of them individually does). So for instance, my view of what "account = X" should mean is "match all transactions that have at least one posting with account X". You should never be able to isolate postings from their transactions, it breaks the DE system. Then if you want to restrict what you end up printing out, that's fine, but that's an entirely different operation, one that only filters what gets rendered, and that would depend only on the report type, it would never affect any calculations. FWIW, this is what I have in mind for my own little filter language thingmajig. -- --- 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.
