It's been rumoured that [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > > Creating a new split might look like this:
> > >
> > > (define (initialize-split) ;;; Returns a gnc-split-structure
> > > (let ((ptr (gnc:split-create))
> > > (splitstruct (build-mystruct-instance gnc-split-structure)))
> > > (splitstruct 'put 'gncpointer ptr)
> > > splitstruct))
> >
> > What's the advantage to this over just using:
> >
> > (gnc:malloc-split)
> >
> > as provided by g-wrap as a wrapper for xaccMallocSplit and then using
> > the normal (or some new ones if we need them) g-wrapped split
> > manipulators? And if the current manipulators are just too scheme
> > unfriendly, then we can add some friendlier wrappers to
> > src/scm/convenience-wrappers.scm (or wherever) as I'm doing for the
> > user interaction stuff..
>
> The plan is to have that set up the split, and then I set up all
> the other splits, and can populate them all in whatever order
> is appropriate from the "turning-QIF-into-GnuCash" perspective.
How does this answer the "why not just use (gnc:malloc-split)" question?
> > >From my semi-careful reading, I think you've mostly understand the
> > structure. Note that AFAIK there's no global list of transactions
> > anywhere. They're just pointed to by all the relvant splits they
> > contain.
>
> That's the impression I get from the way the data structure seems to
> work, so I think we're reading this the same.
Right, there is no global list of transactions. There didn't seem to be
a need for this, and if there had been one, it might have lead to confusion ...
> > Also, I can't recall if splits are unique. I thought they
> > were, but I'm not sure. i.e. is there only one copy of a given split
> > that each account (on both the sending and receiving end) point to, or
> > is there one copy for each account...
>
> That makes sense, and I hope there's only just the one copy of each
> split.
Splits are unique. A single split can refernce a single account only.
Thus, a transfer between two accounts by necessity consists of two splits.
Those two splits are paired together as an 'atomic unit' by means of
the transaction.
> The thing to "get" is that I only intend for this stuff to persist on
> the Scheme side for long enough to populate all the
> splits/transactions/accounts. The data can then get dropped.
One thing to 'get' is that the engine API is supposed to allow the
engine to be implemented on top of other persistants-store or network
devices. e.g. it is theoretically possible to implement the engine
on top of a db2 interface, or make it run over the net. If everything
goes right, such a change should not impact the scheme code or the gui,
but please do keep this in mind. (this is why the malloc-split question
is important).
--linas
> THAT COMMAND IS NOT KNOWN TO THIS PROGRAM.
> MAYBE YOU SHOULD LOG IN? (TYPE HELP FOR DETAILS)
! good one.
----- %< -------------------------------------------- >% ------
The GnuCash / X-Accountant Mailing List
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
put "unsubscribe gnucash-devel [EMAIL PROTECTED]" in the body
