> On Apr 2, 2021, at 9:42 AM, zuperkoleopt...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2021-04-02 at 08:47 -0700, John Ralls wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 2, 2021, at 8:37 AM, John Ralls <jra...@ceridwen.us> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Apr 2, 2021, at 4:05 AM, zuperkoleopt...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> which by the way it
>>>> does not use the default security fraction which is 1/00000000
>>>> but
>>>> 1/0000.
>>>
>>> The price is in Euro, so it displays as 1/100 of the Euro's
>>> fraction. That's for display only, the actual calculated price is
>>> as exact a fraction as can be represented with two 64-bit integers.
>>
>> Sorry, you meant that the BTC amount in the trading split is rounded
>> to 1/1000. Maybe there's a 1/1000000 clamp left somewhere in the
>> balancing logic?
>>
>> Regards,
>> John Ralls
>>
> Yes you are right, the account created by the trading subsystem,
> Trading:Crypto Currency:BTC-EUR, is in BTC which is a security in the
> system not in eur which is a currency.
> Although I have switched to use "commodity value" in the "smallest
> fraction" switch it still uses 1/0000 instead the 1/00000000.
> But this is somehow minor issue as I assume it does not affect the
> actual value of the account, it's just visual.
No, it's pretty clearly keeping the transaction from balancing because .0012 !=
.00115652.
As for the trading splits miraculously appearing, did that happen to all
cross-commodity transactions in your book or just ones that you touched?
Regards,
John Ralls
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
