Implementing proper cost basis tracking for shares

Dave Peticolas
Mon, 30 Oct 2000 14:27:17 -0800

Rob Browning writes:
> Robert Graham Merkel <> writes:
> >  > I don't really know how much flexibility we'd want to allow initially,
> >  > but changing the internals at some point might make accomodating
> >  > various different schemes easier.
> >  > 
> > I dunno if you saw the discussion I was having on the list a while ago
> > about being able to do this, but only for reports.  If we generalised that 
> to
> > *everything*, it would be an interesting possibility :)
> If we did this, I'd probably want to make the flat account list a
> GList or a GArray, and make the "views" into it, a GList (or GSList)
> of GLists (or GSLists) which "bottoms out" in Account*'s.
> Seem's pretty straightforward, though I believe the point we stalled
> at last time was, given this setup, what do account names mean?  Right
> now, the full-name is an implicit part of the Group path used to reach
> it, but in this "new" approach, an account might appear in a variety
> of arrangements.  I think the right answer is that the Account name
> would need to be more descriptive, and probably enforced unique,
> something like "MegaBank Savings" rather than just "Savings".
> Switching to the "flat list" approach would probably be more database
> friendly, and it would simplify code that just needs to traverse all
> the accounts...

I agree, but I think I would miss the ability to have short account
names. Couldn't we let the user choose a 'Default View' that performs
the same function as the current hierarchy?