On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:08 PM, John Wiegley <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> Martin Blais <[email protected]> writes: > > > How timely we've just had this discussion: I completed a script that > > generates a fake user with a fair amount of detail, and as I'm now > writing a > > script to convert Beancount syntax to Ledger format, the precision issue > is > > biting me. Here's a problematic example with how Ledger does its > precision > > tracking (simplified after removing a lot of other stuff around it). > > Great data, Martin! Can you add this to the bugtracker for one of our > precision related issues, or maybe open a new one? > Thanks. Just to be sure, do you consider this side-effect a bug, or WAI? I've added a discussion of number representation and precision issues to my comparison document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dW2vIjaXVJAf9hr7GlZVe3fJOkM-MtlVjvCO1ZpNLmg/edit#heading=h.qfxb9inw3w17 Also, I managed to get my example generator output file containing multiple years of data converted from Beancount to Ledger syntax and it parses, and the numbers from the balance reports do match each other. It contains a lto of regular transactions but also funds investments and regular stock trading. The example file should form a nice corpus of realistic transactions to build examples over and make comparisons of reports between our softwares. Simon: I will try to convert to HLedger too. -- --- 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.
