On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:50 AM Stefano Zacchiroli <z...@upsilon.cc> wrote:
> Thanks for your feedback Martin. > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 01:33:34AM -0400, Martin Blais wrote: > > Yes, that should be the goal, though I have in mind a perhaps more > > restricted version where, like today, the options have to be set in the > > top-level file; the only difference is that it'll barf when you try to > set > > options in included files (which it always should have, this is > essentially > > a bug fix). > > But why? What's the added value of restricting options to only be in the > master file? I'm having other family members read the textual version of > our books and they can make sense of the double-accounting part, but the > beancount-specific options don't make sense for them, so I'd really like > to hide them away with a simple oneliner include at the beginning of the > books. > I get it, it's not for value, it's done only for implementation simplicity. I can review that old code and see if this can be reviewed and implemented better. FWIW I do something similar with other textual document system (e.g., > LaTeX), and I find that hiding low-level details in a single "you > shouldn't care about this stuff" file has a lot of value. > > > > The main feature I lack to have feature parity with Ledger-CLI is > > > the ability to add tags to individual transaction legs. I'm assuming > > > this will go hand-in-hand with relaxing the distinction between > > > metadata/ tags/ links (by making them syntactic sugar for metadata, > > > I'm guessing), which is great, thanks! > > > > You mean you'd like to have the ability to add #.... at the end of a > > posting line? That should be easy to add, but I'd have to change the > > schema. Can you motivate it? When / how / why do you need to tag > > individual postings whereby tagging the transaction isn't enough? > > That would be added in v2. > > (This is https://github.com/beancount/beancount/issues/144 and we should > probably have the discussion there, but just in case: ) > > A classic example for me is: > > 2020-07-08 * "foobar bookshop" "books + card game" > Expenses:Books 32.90 EUR ; book A, B, > and C > Expenses:Games 15.00 EUR ; card game for > kid #hulk > Assets:Checking -47.90 EUR > > where I want to tag one of the lag has pertaining to my kid (no, he is > not actually called Hulk), but not the rest of the transaction. > > (Yes, I can refactor this using two transactions, but it's annoying.) > In the meantime you can use posting metadata, but I think it's sensible syntax (aside from being inside a command). We'll have to figure out a reasonable schema modification. > > Cheers > -- > Stefano Zacchiroli . z...@upsilon.cc . upsilon.cc/zack . . o . . . o . o > Computer Science Professor . CTO Software Heritage . . . . . o . . . o o > Former Debian Project Leader & OSI Board Director . . . o o o . . . o . > « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Beancount" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/20200714125021.ttl7dnzl4jdho2ao%40upsilon.cc > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beancount" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhPk8yt4A%3DPtHKux7dZ7Nx8ZqFUJU64FheVjYntvTYz2QQ%40mail.gmail.com.
