On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 04:09:38PM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote: > Quoting Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 03:49:03PM -0400, David Hampton wrote: > > > On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 15:03 -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > > > > > > > Incidentally, is this behavior specific to g2? I've never noticed it > > > > in 1.x, but I imagine the register code hasn't changed much. > > > > > > It was added in HEAD and pulled into g2. Derek thinks the blank split > > > code should be rewritten. I'm for reverting the change to the > > > transaction scrubbing code that created the problem. > > > > Nice to know I'm not imagining things. The blank split code *is* > > particularly bad, but I think the effort to fix/rewrite it in the > > current register is probably 50% of the effort to rewrite the whole > > register. > > > > I looked pretty deeply into the register code a couple months ago > > and I don't remember seeing any relatioship between transaction > > scrubbing code and the transaction dirtying. Could you point me > > toward what you mean? > > xaccTransCommitEdit() calls xaccScrubTrans() which calls a bunch of other > functions that add the extra splits and dirty the books. > > The problem is that the register creates the blank transaction and blank split > and then calls xaccTransBeginEdit() and xaccTransCommitEdit() immediately, > before the user has created any data in the split. This causes the additional > split(s) to get created and commited, too, thereby dirtying the book. > > What NEEDS to happen is that the register should call xaccTransBeginEdit() > when > it creates the blank split/trans but _NOT_ call xaccTransCommitEdit() until > after the user actually enters data into the thing.
I disagree. Moving the cursor through the register (which creates a blank split on each Transaction I move through) should not call xaccTransBeginEdit (and presumably xaccTransRollback) for each Transaction. xaccTransBeginEdit should only be called once the user starts to change data. > > I do NOT believe this is 50% of a register rewrite. Far from it; I think it's > maybe a day or two of work for someone who doesn't know the register to move > that CommitEdit() and make sure the Begin's and Commit's are properly balanced > in all cases. > > I am fairly confident that this will solve the problem. If the Rollback doesn't dirty anything, then you may be right, but I don't think this is the best solution. However, it may be better than what's there. -chris > > > -chris > > > > > David > > -derek > > -- > Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory > Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) > URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH > [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
