Disclaimer: I'm a new enthusiast; so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.
I don't think supporting both would be good for Ledger. A trend I see in the Ledger docs is "Use <thing> for whatever you want it to mean." — but <thing> has to be defined. If Ledger begins to change along the lines of "You can use <thing1> <thing2> or <thing3> to depict/achieve the same thing", it risks expanding the surface area for potential tech debt without adding any real value. My suggestion is for Ledger to pick a direction and stick to it. Either it continues with the `%(` syntax and updates the information in the docs, or it unifies the syntax with `$(` and releases a breaking change. Either choice is fine. I think they should be mutually exclusive. *Igbanam* On Sat, Jul 6, 2024 at 12:03 AM Martin Michlmayr <[email protected]> wrote: > * John Wiegley <[email protected]> [2024-07-05 16:18]: > > > So… I was looking to do a PR for this, and I realized this feature > already > > > exists — just under a different syntax. You were right John. What's > needed > > > here may be an update to the documentation; not a code change. > > > > Ah, well that shows how unfortunate a syntactic choice it was. It’s > easily > > changed to $( instead of %(. > > Would it make sense to support both? > -- > Martin Michlmayr > https://www.cyrius.com/ > -- --- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ledger-cli/CAOmRJrefvOwi552ohffxRRbS5RSQXubZJTZNe4_-%2B1YPdzscQg%40mail.gmail.com.
