why not account-get-transactions and simpler cash-flow test for already seen split?
Larry Evans
cppljevans at cox-internet.com
Thu Jul 6 23:13:02 EDT 2006
The code in both:
http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/browser/gnucash/trunk/src/report/standard-reports/advanced-portfolio.scm
and in:
http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/browser/gnucash/trunk/src/report/standard-reports/cash-flow.scm
both seem to have similar code for processing a set of accounts and
their transactions. In pseudo-code, this idiom is:
for-each account in set-of-accounts
for-each account-split in account
transaction = parent-of account-split
for-each transaction-split in transaction
if(transaction-split != account-split)
do-something with transaction-split
Now the function and variable names in actual code and pseudo code are:
pseudo actual
------ ------
parent-of gnc:split-get-parent
account-split split
transaction-split s
transaction parent
and the if test in actual code is:
advanced-portfolio:
same-split? s split
cash-flow:
split-in-list? s seen-split-list
where: seen-split-list is a list of splits which is appended to
for each time the test fails.
Could the advanced-portfolio test couldn't be used in place of the
cash-flow test, and thereby, save some time?
Also, could someone explain why there couldn't just be a function:
gnc:account-get-transactions
which could be used to get the list of transaction in an account instead
of getting the splits with gnc:account-get-split-list? It seems from
looking at the code that the parent is actually a transaction because
there's this code:
gnc:transaction-get-splits parent
TIA.
More information about the gnucash-user
mailing list