Thanks for the explanation, Martin.
The lot dates are already inferred from the transaction. I wonder why would 
the cost not be inferred from the price, either. It would be a shortcut of 
convenience.

On Friday, 9 May 2025 at 9:42:27 am UTC+2 [email protected] wrote:

> * 'Alen Šiljak' via Beancount <[email protected]> [2025-05-04 
> 05:49]:
> > During the migration, I have identified a record that causes problems 
> and I
> > don't really understand why.
>
> > 2013-02-25 txn "Buy BYE"
> > Assets:Investments:Shares:BYE 10595 BYE @ 0.47 YEN
> > Expenses:Commissions 19.95 YEN
> > Assets:Investments:Cash -4999.60 YEN
>
> Stefano already answered your question but just to expand a bit.
>
> Ledger treats costs ({...}) and prices (@ ...) as very similar whereas
> there's an explicit difference in beancount.
>
> So if we take your transaction:
>
> 2013-02-25 * "Buy BYE"
> Assets:Investments:Shares:BYE 10595 BYE @ 0.47 YEN
> Expenses:Commissions 19.95 YEN
> Assets:Investments:Cash -4999.60 YEN
>
> If you look at the ledger balance report with --lots, you'll see that
> ledger added a cost:
>
> ledger -f a1 bal :bye --lots
> 10595 BYE {0.47 YEN} [2013-02-25] Assets:Investments:Shares:BYE
>
> But this is not how it works in beancount. You need to specify a cost
> explicitly if you want one -- in many cases (e.g. cash / currencies) I
> won't want FOO @ BAR to create a cost (ledger "lot).
>
> People are often not aware of this in ledger-land because ledger
> allows you to remove a lot that doesn't exist (*); which beancount
> wisely doesn't allow.
>
> (*) You only see the mess if you look at it with "bal --ledger".
>
> -- 
> Martin Michlmayr
> https://www.cyrius.com/
>

-- 
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/6658f55b-f3fc-4909-ba05-3b02e3876b20n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to