Clark Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:This sounds very interesting! I haven't been able to come up with a 'best' way to hierarchicalize (is that a word) my accounts.> I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with GLists or GSLists, but the comment
> about "'bottoms out' in Account*'s" makes me a bit nervous that it
> would only allow entries into the "leaf" accounts. There are times
> when it is convenient to put some entries into a given "level", and
> others into a "sublevel", e.g., I might have
> "autos->pickup->maintenance" that catches most of the costs, but if
> I wanted to keep track of, say, tires, these might go into
> "autos->pickup->maintenance->tires".Good point, but I wasn't planning to preclude that. At each level,
the account "view"'s list would be a possible mixture of sub-lists and
actual account pointers like this:(("autos" . guid-331)
(("clunker" . guid-443))
(("pickup" . guid-683)
(("maintenance" . guid-4392)
(("tires" . guid-342)
("electrical" . guid-9221)
("fuzzy-dice" . guid-113)))))Which is equivalent to:
autos
clunker
pickup
maintenance
tires
fuzzy-diceWhether or not we'd use actual Account*'s or guids is debatable...
Also (see below), some of the names in the "view" might not even have
associated accounts.(GLists are glib's doubly linked list, and GSLists are singly linked,
and more accurately match the semantics of scheme lists.)> I hope that you're just using the space delimiter in "MegaBank
> Savings" as an arbitrary name. One of the nifty things about
> gnucash as opposed to Quicken is that I don't have to replace spaces
> in the account names with underscores... (and I also don't have to
> stop at some tiny number [16?] of characters!)The name "MegaBank Savings" would be the "true name" of the account,
but it might be referred to from a variety of "view" structures.The idea is that with these "views" you can organize your accounts in
*ways* (not just one fixed way) that make sense to you. It's also a
machinery that we, as the programmers, can use to collect and display
your accounts in various meaningful ways.For example, presume the actual account named "MegaBank Savings" had a
guid of ABCDE, then you might have:Institution
MegaBank
checking -> BCEF
savings -> ABCDE
visa -> 4EFA
brokerage
clearing -> CCFD
securities
IBM -> FF61
GNU -> FA0B
SuperFund -> EF11
SuperUnion
checking -> 5651
visa -> 7790(note that the Brokerage doesn't have an associated account because
it's just a placeholder organizing all the stock bank and fund
accounts that together represent all your holdings in the brokerage.
Same goes for the "securities" name.)and perhaps
Assets
MegaBank
checking -> BCEF
savings -> ABCDE
brokerage ...
SuperUnion
checking -> 5651
Liabilities
MegaBank
visa -> 4EFA
SuperUnion
visa -> 7790And maybe another flatter one by type:
bank accounts
MegaBank checking -> BCEF
MegaBank savings -> BCEF
SuperUnion checking -> 5651
MegaBank brokerage clearing -> CCFD
credit cards
MegaBank visa -> 4EFA
SuperUnion visa -> 7790
securities
MegaBank IBM -> FF61
MegaBank GNU -> FA0B
MegaBank SuperFund -> EF11
Fid Retirement SuperFund -> AADF
ET brokerage DFFO -> AADFAll of the names in these views were assigned when the views were
created, but the underlying unique accounts still have their own
"official names", and somewhere, we'd have a view that let you look at
the official flat list of all your accounts, probably sorted
alphabetically...MegaBank brokerage clearing -> CCFD
MegaBank checking -> BCEF
MegaBank savings -> BCEF
MegaBank visa -> 4EFA
SuperUnion checking -> 5651
SuperUnion visa -> 7790This is the pool from which you'd draw when creating "views", and it's
the only place you'd be guaranteed to find *all* your accounts.--
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnumatic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
If this were implemented, would this mean that in each hierarchical view, we would get different totals for the non-leaf accounts? (Which would be quite useful!)
I've also thought, that for some account types, such as income and expense in particular, it might be nice not to total the entire account history, but perhaps only year to date, or some other selectable figure. This would almost be a kind of generic report in the main gnucash window and would eliminate going to an actual report for a lot of simple questions.
-- Gilligan | __o .oooO /| _ \<,_ ( ) /p|\ (_)/ (_) \ ( Oooo. / | \ ------------ \_) ( ) ======== ) / ======== [EMAIL PROTECTED] (_/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
