gnucash/src/register/ledger-core/split-register-layout.c

[Dave Peticolas]

--=-VN+S1DZTo7wNyYkDHLNk
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, 2001-11-25 at 16:37, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Dave Peticolas <dave@krondo.com> writes:
>=20
> > Well, maybe I spoke too soon. Perhaps we need to take
> > some more of the higher-level functionality in the split
> > register and refactor it back to the register so that
> > split registers remain just for splits.
> >=20
> > dave
>=20
> That's fine with me.  I would think that basically the SplitLedger
> should really _just_ define the layout, getters, and setters for
> splits.  So, how hard is this extra refactoring?

I don't really know, I haven't thought about it.
Specifically I haven't thought about what needs
to be refactored, certainly not all of it does.

Most of what is in src/ledger-core that isn't
about layout, getters, and setters, is stuff
that makes the split register into something
that is easy to use for editing splits and
transactions *specifically*.

I'm talking about 'icing', like detecting
imbalance, auto-completion, auto-creation
of new accounts from names, etc. A lot of
this icing is specific to splits and transactions
and would either be very different or simply
wouldn't exist in other register types.

So, let me change my opinion here. I think
you should make the new register a separate
instance of a 'register'. Initially, it will
be very bare-bones. Then, it will be easier
to look at the split ledger and see just
what would be useful when refactored.

dave


--=-VN+S1DZTo7wNyYkDHLNk
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQA8AZGW5effKKCmfpIRAib+AJ9hazlo0/jfJQWvo6nL2sUKH1w9ywCggU//
4yljg1BTWPqM+slPKPICQZU=
=noCd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-VN+S1DZTo7wNyYkDHLNk--