Hi Bo, Why not using currency as type of the variables (and the columns too). You definitely will find the missing Swedish öre
Tony -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bo Franzén Sent: woensdag 7 maart 2012 11:42 To: RBASE-L Mailing List Subject: [RBASE-L] - Strange Missing one hundredth in SUM variable Hello, I have cashbook as a treasurer in my Swedish chess club and I keep the records through R:BASE (of course!). It’s a small relational data base, one master table and only one slave table for information in the form I utilize. There are roughly three transactions a week and all that money is handled over simply one bank account. Money coming in to the account is registered in the column inkomst (revenue), money being paid out in utgift (expense); both those columns are REAL so that utgift can be put in negative figures. In the form, in order to immediately discover mistakes on my side, I’ve written two variables summing up each column and a third one in order to inform me of the balance (sw. saldo) in the favour of the club. That balance should of course be identical with the last statement of the account I’ve got by post from the bank. Those variables, Memo Variables, look like this: 3 : REAL vinkomst = SUM inkomst FROM plusgiro 4 : REAL vutgift = SUM utgift FROM plusgiro 5 : REAL vsaldo = (vinkomst + vutgift) The two first variables are shown with only one decimal, in spite of the fact that there are two in the tables. So inkomst is shown as 362048.7 and utgift as -290733.9. The correct figures in two digits are 362048.72 and -290733.90 and it’s obvious that R:BASE only shows one decimal in those two first variables. The same can be said when Computing at the R> promt, while the input is OK when opening the table. But the last variable above, vsaldo, is (much to my surprise) given in two decimals: 71314.81, simply reducing our money with one Swedish öre, since the correct sum is 71314.82. That is indeed a petty amount, even compared with a US cent! So this is certainly no big deal (if it’s not a bug), just annoying. But how does a solution look like to get this perfectly straight? Bo Franzén Department of Economic History Stockholm University
