questions about plugging a palm conduit into Gnucash

2004-12-08 Thread Philip Lowman
Over the last several months I've become something of a devoted Gnucash user so much so that I'm tracking cash expenditures including Sales Tax these days[!]. Anyways, I am getting sick of asking for a receipt for every cash purchase I make and I'd like to write a palm application which allows

Re: questions about plugging a palm conduit into Gnucash

2004-12-08 Thread Derek Atkins
Philip Lowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Over the last several months I've become something of a devoted > Gnucash user so much so that I'm tracking cash expenditures including > Sales Tax these days[!]. > > Anyways, I am getting sick of asking for a receipt for every cash > purchase I make and

Re: questions about plugging a palm conduit into Gnucash

2004-12-08 Thread Neil Williams
On Wednesday 08 December 2004 11:28 am, Philip Lowman wrote: > Over the last several months I've become something of a devoted Gnucash > user so much so that I'm tracking cash expenditures including Sales Tax > these days[!]. > > Anyways, I am getting sick of asking for a receipt for every cash > p

Re: Business object coding conventions

2004-12-08 Thread Rich Johnson
On Tuesday, December 7, 2004, at 04:50 PM, Derek Atkins wrote: Rich Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: AFAIK the conventions used are implicit and not documented, either in the code or elsewhere. The 'private' aspect is documented only in a few of the *P.h headers and the absence of any 'publi

Scheme scripting with gnucash.

2004-12-08 Thread Carl N.Baldwin
Greetings, i have been looking around for the last day or two for information about doing different things in gnucash from a scheme script. Here's what I would like to do. i would like to write a scheme script that will open my gnucash data file, get a list of accounts, get information about t

Re: Business object coding conventions

2004-12-08 Thread Derek Atkins
Rich Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Man, that's like trying to find a needle in a haystack. It's not > that it's an email > answer, it's that it's an _authoritative_ answer--and certainly more > authoritative > than any inference I could come up with. It's only authoritative by assertion